Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Italian Job – Part One: 5 Star and the Lega blow the blood

SystemSystem Posts: 6,666
edited January 13 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Italian Job – Part One: 5 Star and the Lega blow the bloody doors off

This is an article about Italian politics.

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 10,621
    Part one is very good indeed.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 10,459
    All fun and games until you run out of money...
  • RobDRobD Posts: 36,065
    Cheers for the header, Alanbrooke!
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 40,874
    Charles said:

    Andrew said:

    AndyJS said:


    How many Tory Remainers would have to abstain in such a vote for the government to be defeated?


    Uhhhh..... *screws up eyes really tight** ........

    Con 317 + DUP10 + Lady Hermon, minus dep speaker: 327
    All the rest, minus 2 deps: 312


    So 15 Tory rebels abstaining for a draw, and then Bercow voting for Labour.

    Although if you're going to abstain, surely you'd go full nuclear and vote against?
    Bercow voting against the government in a VONC? That really would be a constitutional innovation!
    Even before recent events it was clear he's not a fan of precedent and convention. If there was ever a tie, on any matter, I don't think we could be 100% sure what he would do.

    They're covering an anti-austerity protest on Al Jazeera, the protest leader is kind of awesome. Literal quote (from memory):

    The government are trying to impose a hard brexit, a no-deal brexit!
    The solution is simple!
    Next week, we will defeat Theresa May's deal!

    Would be hilarious but for the outcome such approaches result in.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 40,874
    And so the scene is set. I confess my general impression of Italian politics from the BBC website is that Salvini in particular has been quite visible and populist, and the government there is constantly sniping at the EU but that at the end of the day the parties in Italy will always back down because whatever discontent there is the voters remain pro EU.

    I shall have to wait for the next part to see how close to the truth that impression is.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 40,874
    Mortimer said:

    Just read the STimes article.

    Good justification to delay the vote IMHO.

    Please gods no.
  • asjohnstoneasjohnstone Posts: 1,086
    kle4 said:

    Mortimer said:

    Just read the STimes article.

    Good justification to delay the vote IMHO.

    Please gods no.
    Don't see what possible grounds May would have to delay the vote a second time.
  • asjohnstoneasjohnstone Posts: 1,086
    edited January 13
    From the Sunday Times, John Major, let's revoke Article 50.

    "Major rejects claims that ignoring the referendum result would be a betrayal as “nonsense” and insisted a second referendum would be “the definitive decision” by persuading each party leader to make a public statement that the result would be honoured"

    Umm, didn't we have public statements last time that the result would be honoured ? What's changed ?

    Do these people really think anyone is going to fall for this crap? It's make the plebs vote until they get it right, nothing more.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 26,045

    From the Sunday Times, John Major, let's revoke Article 50.

    "Major rejects claims that ignoring the referendum result would be a betrayal as “nonsense” and insisted a second referendum would be “the definitive decision” by persuading each party leader to make a public statement that the result would be honoured"

    Umm, didn't we have public statements last time that the result would be honoured ? What's changed ?

    Do these people really think anyone is going to fall for this crap? It's make the plebs vote until they get it right, nothing more.

    The result last time wasn’t actionable in the same way a decision between revocation and ratification of the withdrawal agreement would be. The mandate from such a referendum could be discharged immediately.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 40,874
    edited January 13

    From the Sunday Times, John Major, let's revoke Article 50.

    "Major rejects claims that ignoring the referendum result would be a betrayal as “nonsense” and insisted a second referendum would be “the definitive decision” by persuading each party leader to make a public statement that the result would be honoured"

    Umm, didn't we have public statements last time that the result would be honoured ? What's changed ?

    Do these people really think anyone is going to fall for this crap? It's make the plebs vote until they get it right, nothing more.

    Despite William's valiant attempt to make a distinction between the two referendums, and he is right to the extent the outcome of this one would be immediately actionable, he doesn't contest your main point that people said last time it would be honoured and yet as we can clearly see hundreds of mps never had any intention of doing so and were just waiting for the chance of a re run.

    That's obvious first in that the second vote campaign hardly waited to see what deal would emerge, it was always primarily about remaining, and second in how many mps gave approval to trigger A50 and yet now say no deal is completely unacceptable despite their action making it default.

    By labelling it as so unacceptable despite authorising it it makes a further promise that this time they would follow through utterly pointless. If the options are as bad as they say they'll remain as opposed as ever.

    And if we do want a referendum to settle this, and sadly we probably need that, it's an extension we need. Revokers don't need to reverse salami slice their way to what they want, eating us into it, if remaining is best that's ok to just say. Revoking is the end state, not the means to that end.

    And people don't need to fall for it. The biggest lot don't care because the prize is remaining and anything goes, and others like me see no better option for resolution given parliaments likely failure to just do what it obviously wants, even though i doubt a promise this one for sure we promise would be universally followed.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 40,874

    kle4 said:

    Mortimer said:

    Just read the STimes article.

    Good justification to delay the vote IMHO.

    Please gods no.
    Don't see what possible grounds May would have to delay the vote a second time.
    I didn't see the grounds the first time!
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 40,874
    I had not heard the Lega and 5S leaders started out at opposite ends. Interesting.

    Salvini seems to get a lot more press than the other chap, due to his portfolio I guess.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 40,874
    For an article labelled 'could May Win' from the main page this piece from Kuenssberg seems a very long winded way of saying 'No, barring massive unpredictable twists'

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46831229
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 23,844

    kle4 said:

    Mortimer said:

    Just read the STimes article.

    Good justification to delay the vote IMHO.

    Please gods no.
    Don't see what possible grounds May would have to delay the vote a second time.
    Bloody-mindedness.

    Table the Meaningful Vote for the week commencing 25th March. That should concentrate some minds. May's Shit Deal or No Deal. Either is Brexit......
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 3,701

    kle4 said:

    Mortimer said:

    Just read the STimes article.

    Good justification to delay the vote IMHO.

    Please gods no.
    Don't see what possible grounds May would have to delay the vote a second time.
    Bloody-mindedness.

    Table the Meaningful Vote for the week commencing 25th March. That should concentrate some minds. May's Shit Deal or No Deal. Either is Brexit......
    May would be ousted by the anti No Deal coalition if she tried this. I haven’t read the S Times article, surely Mortimer is not responding to John Major’s piece? What good reason is there to delay the Vote?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 23,844

    kle4 said:

    Mortimer said:

    Just read the STimes article.

    Good justification to delay the vote IMHO.

    Please gods no.
    Don't see what possible grounds May would have to delay the vote a second time.
    Bloody-mindedness.

    Table the Meaningful Vote for the week commencing 25th March. That should concentrate some minds. May's Shit Deal or No Deal. Either is Brexit......
    May would be ousted by the anti No Deal coalition if she tried this. I haven’t read the S Times article, surely Mortimer is not responding to John Major’s piece? What good reason is there to delay the Vote?
    How? She is bomb-proof. The Cabinet could move against her, but then, she could tie it to a Night of the Long-knives Cabinet reshuffle. She now knows who she can't trust.....
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 3,701
    On topic:
    Salvino and Di Maio is an unholy alliance of populism with fascist undertones (especially given Lega’s history).

    Such things tend to self-combust, but not before delivering widespread damage, bigotry and larceny.

    We will turn a blind eye because it is Italy, unless they actively decide to invade Abyssiania.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 16,641

    On topic:
    Salvino and Di Maio is an unholy alliance of populism with fascist undertones (especially given Lega’s history).

    Such things tend to self-combust, but not before delivering widespread damage, bigotry and larceny.

    We will turn a blind eye because it is Italy, unless they actively decide to invade Abyssiania.

    We're turning a blind eye to it here in the Labour party, never mind in Italy!
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 3,701

    kle4 said:

    Mortimer said:

    Just read the STimes article.

    Good justification to delay the vote IMHO.

    Please gods no.
    Don't see what possible grounds May would have to delay the vote a second time.
    Bloody-mindedness.

    Table the Meaningful Vote for the week commencing 25th March. That should concentrate some minds. May's Shit Deal or No Deal. Either is Brexit......
    May would be ousted by the anti No Deal coalition if she tried this. I haven’t read the S Times article, surely Mortimer is not responding to John Major’s piece? What good reason is there to delay the Vote?
    How? She is bomb-proof. The Cabinet could move against her, but then, she could tie it to a Night of the Long-knives Cabinet reshuffle. She now knows who she can't trust.....
    Half the Cabinet would resign.
    She could try to hold on, but it would be futile.
    Grieve-led amendments would destroy any legislative agency she has, and ultimately she would lose a VONC.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 10,459
    kle4 said:

    And so the scene is set. I confess my general impression of Italian politics from the BBC website is that Salvini in particular has been quite visible and populist, and the government there is constantly sniping at the EU but that at the end of the day the parties in Italy will always back down because whatever discontent there is the voters remain pro EU.

    I shall have to wait for the next part to see how close to the truth that impression is.

    They don't have an argument with the EU, they have an argument with arithmetic. Since they're in the Euro and they don't have the ability to quietly steal from savers by debasing the currency, they're relying on people lending them money. If they run out of these people they'll have to stop spending. The EU rules are supposed to stop them getting to a crisis point like this, but if they ignore rules, the EU will most likely tut ineffectually and leave it to the lenders to explain to the populists how maths works.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 10,624
    edited January 13
    An interesting article but as with your previous ones it seems designed to show that the EU and the euro are falling apart. In Italy -as with Germany and France-this couldn't be further from the truth. The Lira was not only not popular it was loathed. Its doubtful you'd find one in a thousand who would want to give up the Euro and return to it. It is not even mainstream.

    Italy's politicians are more concerned with issues of Italian corruption than anything that's happening in euroland and always have been. It was this and a bit of humour that got Grillo noticed but it's always been the Italian obsession. What's more despite the problems with African refugees I haven't heard discussion anywhere about an Italian withdrawl from Shengen.

    I really can't understand the desire of Brexiteers to show that the EU is falling apart. If the UK wants to go it alone fine but at least have the courage to do it without needing the reassurance that everyone else secretly wants to do the same thing.

    (I should say I have made no study whatsoever of Italian politics but I have worked many times in Italy and had an Italian girlfriend and it's surprising what you can learn!)
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 24,742
    "The Tories are on the brink of a historic split, senior Conservatives have warned, as Brexiteers and Remainers both threatened to torpedo the Government if they did not get their way on Brexit."

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/01/12/tories-brink-imploding-brexit/
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 3,055

    kle4 said:

    Mortimer said:

    Just read the STimes article.

    Good justification to delay the vote IMHO.

    Please gods no.
    Don't see what possible grounds May would have to delay the vote a second time.
    Bloody-mindedness.

    Table the Meaningful Vote for the week commencing 25th March. That should concentrate some minds. May's Shit Deal or No Deal. Either is Brexit......
    As a course of action it has the reek of the caudillo about it and the government wouldn't make it to 25th March.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 16,641
    AndyJS said:

    "The Tories are on the brink of a historic split, senior Conservatives have warned, as Brexiteers and Remainers both threatened to torpedo the Government if they did not get their way on Brexit."

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/01/12/tories-brink-imploding-brexit/

    The last time the Tories had an informal split that led to multiple candidates standing in the same seat was in 1906.

    The last time they actually split into separate parties was in 1846.

    Even if we add in Labour, we're still back to 1931.

    It is very unusual for political parties to formally divide, even under extreme pressure. I will believe it when I see it.

    In the Tory split of 1846, the other issue was that the Whig leader, Russell, was popular and widely respected. His equivalent at this moment is Corbyn. Whatever the hysteria, no way will the likes of Grieve and Clarke actively enable a government led by Corbyn.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 10,945
    We make Italian politics look modest and sensible.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 23,622
    edited January 13
    ydoethur said:

    AndyJS said:

    "The Tories are on the brink of a historic split, senior Conservatives have warned, as Brexiteers and Remainers both threatened to torpedo the Government if they did not get their way on Brexit."

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/01/12/tories-brink-imploding-brexit/

    The last time the Tories had an informal split that led to multiple candidates standing in the same seat was in 1906.

    The last time they actually split into separate parties was in 1846.

    Even if we add in Labour, we're still back to 1931.

    It is very unusual for political parties to formally divide, even under extreme pressure. I will believe it when I see it.

    In the Tory split of 1846, the other issue was that the Whig leader, Russell, was popular and widely respected. His equivalent at this moment is Corbyn. Whatever the hysteria, no way will the likes of Grieve and Clarke actively enable a government led by Corbyn.
    Nor do they need to.

    These are very unusual circumstances. In particular, people are still underestimating just how deeply Brexit has bitten into people’s souls. Political wonks are so used to caring about all kinds of abstract stuff passionately that the one occasion that everyone else is doing that too, they don’t notice.

    A split looks quite likely to me. The form may well depend in large part on Theresa May’s ultimate choices.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 23,844

    kle4 said:

    Mortimer said:

    Just read the STimes article.

    Good justification to delay the vote IMHO.

    Please gods no.
    Don't see what possible grounds May would have to delay the vote a second time.
    Bloody-mindedness.

    Table the Meaningful Vote for the week commencing 25th March. That should concentrate some minds. May's Shit Deal or No Deal. Either is Brexit......
    May would be ousted by the anti No Deal coalition if she tried this. I haven’t read the S Times article, surely Mortimer is not responding to John Major’s piece? What good reason is there to delay the Vote?
    How? She is bomb-proof. The Cabinet could move against her, but then, she could tie it to a Night of the Long-knives Cabinet reshuffle. She now knows who she can't trust.....
    Half the Cabinet would resign.
    She could try to hold on, but it would be futile.
    Grieve-led amendments would destroy any legislative agency she has, and ultimately she would lose a VONC.
    Half the Cabinet would be sacked first.

    That would also give her cover for pulling the Meaningful Vote.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 16,641

    ydoethur said:

    AndyJS said:

    "The Tories are on the brink of a historic split, senior Conservatives have warned, as Brexiteers and Remainers both threatened to torpedo the Government if they did not get their way on Brexit."

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/01/12/tories-brink-imploding-brexit/

    The last time the Tories had an informal split that led to multiple candidates standing in the same seat was in 1906.

    The last time they actually split into separate parties was in 1846.

    Even if we add in Labour, we're still back to 1931.

    It is very unusual for political parties to formally divide, even under extreme pressure. I will believe it when I see it.

    In the Tory split of 1846, the other issue was that the Whig leader, Russell, was popular and widely respected. His equivalent at this moment is Corbyn. Whatever the hysteria, no way will the likes of Grieve and Clarke actively enable a government led by Corbyn.
    Nor do they need to.

    These are very unusual circumstances. In particular, people are still underestimating just how deeply Brexit has bitten into people’s souls. Political wonks are so used to caring about all kinds of abstract stuff passionately that the one occasion that everyone else is doing that too, they don’t notice.

    A split looks quite likely to me. The form may well depend in large part on Theresa May’s ultimate choices.
    One of the reasons we've come to this impasse - leaving aside the FTPA - is that if May falls, Corbyn is an immediate alternative and might well have first refusal on forming a government.
  • El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 1,317

    ydoethur said:

    AndyJS said:

    "The Tories are on the brink of a historic split, senior Conservatives have warned, as Brexiteers and Remainers both threatened to torpedo the Government if they did not get their way on Brexit."

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/01/12/tories-brink-imploding-brexit/

    The last time the Tories had an informal split that led to multiple candidates standing in the same seat was in 1906.

    The last time they actually split into separate parties was in 1846.

    Even if we add in Labour, we're still back to 1931.

    It is very unusual for political parties to formally divide, even under extreme pressure. I will believe it when I see it.

    In the Tory split of 1846, the other issue was that the Whig leader, Russell, was popular and widely respected. His equivalent at this moment is Corbyn. Whatever the hysteria, no way will the likes of Grieve and Clarke actively enable a government led by Corbyn.
    Nor do they need to.

    These are very unusual circumstances. In particular, people are still underestimating just how deeply Brexit has bitten into people’s souls. Political wonks are so used to caring about all kinds of abstract stuff passionately that the one occasion that everyone else is doing that too, they don’t notice.

    A split looks quite likely to me. The form may well depend in large part on Theresa May’s ultimate choices.
    I agree a split is underestimated, and possibly imminent.

    Grieve and Boles are both being threatened by their constituency associations. Soubry is not far behind. There may be more.

    Three independent Conservatives is at least a caucus, and that’s not far from a party. It may only be a matter of weeks, though that’s probably unlikely.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 7,199
    Roger said:

    An interesting article but as with your previous ones it seems designed to show that the EU and the euro are falling apart. In Italy -as with Germany and France-this couldn't be further from the truth. The Lira was not only not popular it was loathed. Its doubtful you'd find one in a thousand who would want to give up the Euro and return to it. It is not even mainstream.

    Italy's politicians are more concerned with issues of Italian corruption than anything that's happening in euroland and always have been. It was this and a bit of humour that got Grillo noticed but it's always been the Italian obsession. What's more despite the problems with African refugees I haven't heard discussion anywhere about an Italian withdrawl from Shengen.

    I really can't understand the desire of Brexiteers to show that the EU is falling apart. If the UK wants to go it alone fine but at least have the courage to do it without needing the reassurance that everyone else secretly wants to do the same thing.

    (I should say I have made no study whatsoever of Italian politics but I have worked many times in Italy and had an Italian girlfriend and it's surprising what you can learn!)

    Yes, the view of my Italian colleagues is much the same, the grievances are about their own politicians, and they recognise that the economic stagnation of the country is more due to internal issues. Both work in Leicester rather than Rome because of the lack of promotion prospects domestically in a fossilised and nepotistic medical system in Italy.

    Incidentally, despite @Alanbrooke's constant sniping at Merkel, her approval ratings are sky high compared with UK politicians.

  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 23,622
    The meaningful vote has to be held by 21 January.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 16,641
    edited January 13

    Grieve and Boles are both being threatened by their constituency associations.

    I know about Boles, but do you have a source for that claim about Grieve? Because despite Amplefield Andy's persistent claims to the contrary, I've seen nothing to suggest he might be retiring or forced out. Indeed, what I have seen suggest Beaconsfield CA is foursquare behind him.

    Doesn't mean it's not out there given how little time I have to research such things, but I'd be interested to see it.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 3,701
    edited January 13

    ydoethur said:

    AndyJS said:

    "The Tories are on the brink of a historic split, senior Conservatives have warned, as Brexiteers and Remainers both threatened to torpedo the Government if they did not get their way on Brexit."

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/01/12/tories-brink-imploding-brexit/

    The last time the Tories had an informal split that led to multiple candidates standing in the same seat was in 1906.

    The last time they actually split into separate parties was in 1846.

    Even if we add in Labour, we're still back to 1931.

    It is very unusual for political parties to formally divide, even under extreme pressure. I will believe it when I see it.

    In the Tory split of 1846, the other issue was that the Whig leader, Russell, was popular and widely respected. His equivalent at this moment is Corbyn. Whatever the hysteria, no way will the likes of Grieve and Clarke actively enable a government led by Corbyn.
    Nor do they need to.

    These are very unusual circumstances. In particular, people are still underestimating just how deeply Brexit has bitten into people’s souls. Political wonks are so used to caring about all kinds of abstract stuff passionately that the one occasion that everyone else is doing that too, they don’t notice.

    A split looks quite likely to me. The form may well depend in large part on Theresa May’s ultimate choices.
    I agree a split is underestimated, and possibly imminent.

    Grieve and Boles are both being threatened by their constituency associations. Soubry is not far behind. There may be more.

    Three independent Conservatives is at least a caucus, and that’s not far from a party. It may only be a matter of weeks, though that’s probably unlikely.
    If Grieve et al were to split, there’s no market for “Liberal Conservatives”. They would need to join the Lib Dems, or perhaps this promised new party we’ve been hearing about for years now.

    I can’t see it happening.

    I can see the aforementioned resigning the whip and seeing out the rest of the term as a caucus of irritants, but I wouldn’t really call that split.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 16,641

    The meaningful vote has to be held by 21 January.

    Which means if it fails this week, we're out with no deal.

    I do hope the Remainers in Parliament finally come to understand this.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 10,945
    Traditionally the Tories do not split, they find a ‘you-nit-eee’ leader who can balance both sides until the heat a goes out of the argument and everyone moves on. Very, very occasionally the party picks a direction that marginalises one group, but again it doesn’t split. At best people slowly melt away.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 7,199
    This is what yesterdays BMG poll looks like:



    It would be interesting to see what polling would show for Britain in the May European elections, were we to revoke A50. I haven't seen any polling on that, but my guess would be that both pro and anti EU parties would have a surge, I don't think the general public have woken up to the nastiness of UKIP under Battern and his imp, Tommy Robinson.

  • RogerRoger Posts: 10,624
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    AndyJS said:

    "The Tories are on the brink of a historic split, senior Conservatives have warned, as Brexiteers and Remainers both threatened to torpedo the Government if they did not get their way on Brexit."

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/01/12/tories-brink-imploding-brexit/

    The last time the Tories had an informal split that led to multiple candidates standing in the same seat was in 1906.

    The last time they actually split into separate parties was in 1846.

    Even if we add in Labour, we're still back to 1931.

    It is very unusual for political parties to formally divide, even under extreme pressure. I will believe it when I see it.

    In the Tory split of 1846, the other issue was that the Whig leader, Russell, was popular and widely respected. His equivalent at this moment is Corbyn. Whatever the hysteria, no way will the likes of Grieve and Clarke actively enable a government led by Corbyn.
    Nor do they need to.

    These are very unusual circumstances. In particular, people are still underestimating just how deeply Brexit has bitten into people’s souls. Political wonks are so used to caring about all kinds of abstract stuff passionately that the one occasion that everyone else is doing that too, they don’t notice.

    A split looks quite likely to me. The form may well depend in large part on Theresa May’s ultimate choices.
    One of the reasons we've come to this impasse - leaving aside the FTPA - is that if May falls, Corbyn is an immediate alternative and might well have first refusal on forming a government.
    The biggest favour Corbyn could do for Remain would be to resign. Starmer or similar would romp to victory. Brexit would be overturned. Anthony Gormley would be commissioned to erect a statiue of Dominic Grieve where the one of Thatcher once stood and the country could go back to the happy clappy place it once was.
  • asjohnstoneasjohnstone Posts: 1,086
    Foxy said:

    This is what yesterdays BMG poll looks like:



    It would be interesting to see what polling would show for Britain in the May European elections, were we to revoke A50. I haven't seen any polling on that, but my guess would be that both pro and anti EU parties would have a surge, I don't think the general public have woken up to the nastiness of UKIP under Battern and his imp, Tommy Robinson.

    Do I see large Tory loses in Scotland projected ? South Ayrshire is the obvious one but I think there are others
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 10,459
    ydoethur said:

    The meaningful vote has to be held by 21 January.

    Which means if it fails this week, we're out with no deal.

    I do hope the Remainers in Parliament finally come to understand this.
    It doesn't (necessarily) mean that, because next week, merciful-giant-meteor-of-death-permitting, parliament will still exist, and be able to pass legislation.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 10,945
    edited January 13

    ydoethur said:

    The meaningful vote has to be held by 21 January.

    Which means if it fails this week, we're out with no deal.

    I do hope the Remainers in Parliament finally come to understand this.
    It doesn't (necessarily) mean that, because next week, merciful-giant-meteor-of-death-permitting, parliament will still exist, and be able to pass legislation.
    If there is a GE parliament is out the picture for a bit.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 10,624
    Foxy said:

    This is what yesterdays BMG poll looks like:



    It would be interesting to see what polling would show for Britain in the May European elections, were we to revoke A50. I haven't seen any polling on that, but my guess would be that both pro and anti EU parties would have a surge, I don't think the general public have woken up to the nastiness of UKIP under Battern and his imp, Tommy Robinson.

    A very well hung parliament.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 7,199
    ydoethur said:

    The meaningful vote has to be held by 21 January.

    Which means if it fails this week, we're out with no deal.

    I do hope the Remainers in Parliament finally come to understand this.
    There are other possibilities, but No Deal certainly increases.

    There is something to be said for it in exposing the delusions of the Brexiteers, but quite a price to pay.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 2,583
    edited January 13
    FPT:
    Mortimer said:

    Yes, the split the Tory's can survive is the pro-EU lot leaving. The spilt they can not survive is the leavers leaving. They would then be a poor persons imitation of the lib dems.

    The troublesome minority in the Tory party can exert influence only in this parliament, and only in a limited set of circs. Which is why I doubt any vote against the Govt in a VONC. By doing so they throw away their own influence.
    But what if Theresa May responds to the defeat of the Withdrawal Agreement by resigning, and advising the Queen to call for Corbyn?

    She's invested everything in her deal. It's basically her entire legacy, and she's put all her energy into negotiating it and telling people that it's the best solution to honouring the referendum result. So, if this Parliament is blocking the deal, why not attempt to replace this Parliament?

    I've been listening to the reports on the radio this morning. If there's any chance of the Grieve-Soubry wing, in connivance with the Speaker, taking control of the legislative process and trying to force the Government to adopt a solution that May plainly disagrees with, then what does she have left to lose? If she throws in the towel then I only see two outcomes:

    1. The Tories stick together as a solid bloc. The DUP (and Lady Hermon) won't vote for a Corbyn-led Government, so the FTPA machinery forces a GE, and May takes her deal out to the country
    2. The Grieve-Soubry wing vote Corbyn into office, and are immediately expelled from their party. The deal is then dead, May resigns the Tory leadership, and the rest of the Conservative Party elects a fresh leader, whilst Corbyn and his various allies are then forced to take responsibility for whatever (inevitably divisive and unpopular) Brexit solution they come to. After that we get a GE anyway, where the Tories stand a decent chance of an immediate return to Government
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 48,075
    Good morning, everyone.

    Despite sleeping terribly and being half-awake, the article was so interesting I read the whole thing, and rather enjoyed it. Acted almost as visual coffee. Looking forward to subsequent parts.

    NB, for those who missed it, my final (probably) inter-season blog is up, about driver pairings for 2019:
    http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.com/2019/01/driver-pairings-for-2019.html
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 7,199

    Foxy said:

    This is what yesterdays BMG poll looks like:



    It would be interesting to see what polling would show for Britain in the May European elections, were we to revoke A50. I haven't seen any polling on that, but my guess would be that both pro and anti EU parties would have a surge, I don't think the general public have woken up to the nastiness of UKIP under Battern and his imp, Tommy Robinson.

    Do I see large Tory loses in Scotland projected ? South Ayrshire is the obvious one but I think there are others
    I count 5 SCon seats. The original map allows zooming, but not on mobiles it seems.

    I am surprised Con still hold Loughborough.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 10,459
    Jonathan said:

    ydoethur said:

    The meaningful vote has to be held by 21 January.

    Which means if it fails this week, we're out with no deal.

    I do hope the Remainers in Parliament finally come to understand this.
    It doesn't (necessarily) mean that, because next week, merciful-giant-meteor-of-death-permitting, parliament will still exist, and be able to pass legislation.
    If there is a GE parliament is out the picture for a bit.
    True, but a non-maniac PM would ask for and (almost certainly) get an extension, and even if they don't I think you still get a new parliament and PM in time to ask for an extension before the currently-scheduled Brexit Day.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 15,190
    A great lead article, and I am looking forward to the sequel.

    The point about blowing the doors off is, of course, that the car itself stays intact.

    The empathy point is a key one. In our politics it is becoming increasingly difficult for politicians to empathise with the other side.

    I spent time travelling in northern and central Italy last autumn. People I spoke to regard Brexit with a mixture of bemusement and amusement; whatever else it has done, it has poured a bucket of cold water over any such appetite in Italy. And the migrant problem was very evident - dog walking each morning, it was very obvious how every park was full of rough sleepers and every litter bin turned out for food. It seemed to me that almost all of them were sub-Saharan rather than middle eastern.

    A question is whether its government can rise above the culture of favours and proto-corruption that pervades almost every aspect of life in Italy.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 16,641
    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    This is what yesterdays BMG poll looks like:



    It would be interesting to see what polling would show for Britain in the May European elections, were we to revoke A50. I haven't seen any polling on that, but my guess would be that both pro and anti EU parties would have a surge, I don't think the general public have woken up to the nastiness of UKIP under Battern and his imp, Tommy Robinson.

    Do I see large Tory loses in Scotland projected ? South Ayrshire is the obvious one but I think there are others
    I count 5 SCon seats. The original map allows zooming, but not on mobiles it seems.

    I am surprised Con still hold Loughborough.
    I'm displeased that they do. By appointing Spielman to head OFSTED, Nicky Morgan proved she's unfit for public office.
  • El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 1,317
    ydoethur said:

    Grieve and Boles are both being threatened by their constituency associations.

    I know about Boles, but do you have a source for that claim about Grieve? Because despite Amplefield Andy's persistent claims to the contrary, I've seen nothing to suggest he might be retiring or forced out. Indeed, what I have seen suggest Beaconsfield CA is foursquare behind him.

    Doesn't mean it's not out there given how little time I have to research such things, but I'd be interested to see it.
    It’s claimed at https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5854901/ANDREW-PIERCE-Dominic-going-jump-pushed.html , and though I’m no fan of the Mail it is the paper of the Tory heartlands.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 23,622
    edited January 13
    On topic, Five Star and Lega have been thrown together as two ugly bugs at the ugly bug ball. Neither has any options so the coalition will prove durable for as long as neither has any options. Lega is winning all the domestic credit at present and I expect at some point it will jettison Five Star. Then things will get interesting.
  • asjohnstoneasjohnstone Posts: 1,086

    kle4 said:

    And so the scene is set. I confess my general impression of Italian politics from the BBC website is that Salvini in particular has been quite visible and populist, and the government there is constantly sniping at the EU but that at the end of the day the parties in Italy will always back down because whatever discontent there is the voters remain pro EU.

    I shall have to wait for the next part to see how close to the truth that impression is.

    They don't have an argument with the EU, they have an argument with arithmetic. Since they're in the Euro and they don't have the ability to quietly steal from savers by debasing the currency, they're relying on people lending them money. If they run out of these people they'll have to stop spending. The EU rules are supposed to stop them getting to a crisis point like this, but if they ignore rules, the EU will most likely tut ineffectually and leave it to the lenders to explain to the populists how maths works.
    At what point to we say it's the lenders problem ? As long as people are stupid enough to keep lending them money, it'll go on.

    What struck me about the so called Greek bailouts, is that the money went to the northern european banks rather than the greek people. In a sane world, the banks that loaned Greece billions that it clearly couldn't afford to repay would have gone under; isn';t that how capitalism is supposed to work ?

    Longer term, the euro needs to be rebalanced some how into a V2.0 where the south isn't locked into a competitive disadvantage.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 7,199
    Roger said:

    Foxy said:

    This is what yesterdays BMG poll looks like:



    It would be interesting to see what polling would show for Britain in the May European elections, were we to revoke A50. I haven't seen any polling on that, but my guess would be that both pro and anti EU parties would have a surge, I don't think the general public have woken up to the nastiness of UKIP under Battern and his imp, Tommy Robinson.

    A very well hung parliament.
    On yesterdays Survation it looks like this:

  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 15,190
    ydoethur said:

    The meaningful vote has to be held by 21 January.

    Which means if it fails this week, we're out with no deal.

    I do hope the Remainers in Parliament finally come to understand this.
    I do hope that you come to understand that it doesn't, necessarily.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 16,641

    ydoethur said:

    Grieve and Boles are both being threatened by their constituency associations.

    I know about Boles, but do you have a source for that claim about Grieve? Because despite Amplefield Andy's persistent claims to the contrary, I've seen nothing to suggest he might be retiring or forced out. Indeed, what I have seen suggest Beaconsfield CA is foursquare behind him.

    Doesn't mean it's not out there given how little time I have to research such things, but I'd be interested to see it.
    It’s claimed at https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5854901/ANDREW-PIERCE-Dominic-going-jump-pushed.html , and though I’m no fan of the Mail it is the paper of the Tory heartlands.
    Thanks.

    I think that Pierce is just pot stirring there, bluntly. Much speculation and innuendo, very little hard fact.

    Still, even the Daily Mail has known to get things right at times, so he may be correct.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 2,583
    On topic: things in Italy will get really interesting when the next recession hits the Eurozone, and indeed there are some suggestions that this is already on the way.

    When Italian government debt reaches the point at which it can no longer be serviced (i.e. when the repayments get so large that raising tax and cutting spending enough to cover them becomes self-defeating through depressing economic activity,) then Italy faces a choice about what flavour of nasty medicine it takes. Will the Italian coalition choose a Greek-style EU/IMF bailout, with all the strings attached, or might it elect to leave the Euro to ease its problems through devaluation, and possibly even borrow some ideas from Iceland and unilaterally default on or restructure some of its debts?
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 4,973

    ydoethur said:

    The meaningful vote has to be held by 21 January.

    Which means if it fails this week, we're out with no deal.

    I do hope the Remainers in Parliament finally come to understand this.
    It doesn't (necessarily) mean that, because next week, merciful-giant-meteor-of-death-permitting, parliament will still exist, and be able to pass legislation.
    I'm still amazed her whips thought her deal could pass, yet some reports say they might lose by 100. Do they not talk to their colleagues?

    If the deal fails, I see three ways out of this. 1) May immediately offers a second referendum, her deal or remain. That might pass in parliament with Labour rebels. 2) If she doesn't do that, Tory MPs have to find a way to get rid of her, and go back to the EU and try and negotiate something new. Or 3) May offers a general election.
  • asjohnstoneasjohnstone Posts: 1,086
    ydoethur said:

    The meaningful vote has to be held by 21 January.

    Which means if it fails this week, we're out with no deal.

    I do hope the Remainers in Parliament finally come to understand this.
    Baring a better deal, obviously
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 15,190
    edited January 13

    ydoethur said:

    AndyJS said:

    "The Tories are on the brink of a historic split, senior Conservatives have warned, as Brexiteers and Remainers both threatened to torpedo the Government if they did not get their way on Brexit."

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/01/12/tories-brink-imploding-brexit/

    The last time the Tories had an informal split that led to multiple candidates standing in the same seat was in 1906.

    The last time they actually split into separate parties was in 1846.

    Even if we add in Labour, we're still back to 1931.

    It is very unusual for political parties to formally divide, even under extreme pressure. I will believe it when I see it.

    In the Tory split of 1846, the other issue was that the Whig leader, Russell, was popular and widely respected. His equivalent at this moment is Corbyn. Whatever the hysteria, no way will the likes of Grieve and Clarke actively enable a government led by Corbyn.
    Nor do they need to.

    These are very unusual circumstances. In particular, people are still underestimating just how deeply Brexit has bitten into people’s souls. Political wonks are so used to caring about all kinds of abstract stuff passionately that the one occasion that everyone else is doing that too, they don’t notice.

    A split looks quite likely to me. The form may well depend in large part on Theresa May’s ultimate choices.
    I agree a split is underestimated, and possibly imminent.

    Grieve and Boles are both being threatened by their constituency associations. Soubry is not far behind. There may be more.

    Three independent Conservatives is at least a caucus, and that’s not far from a party. It may only be a matter of weeks, though that’s probably unlikely.
    And there is a potentially significant slice of the population behind them - essentially Tory leaning folk who are either firm remainers or waverer/Leave voters now concerned about the way things could be heading. Probably comprising much of the educated middle class working age people in business and the professions who haven't already and aren't willing to switch to Corbyn.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 16,641

    kle4 said:

    And so the scene is set. I confess my general impression of Italian politics from the BBC website is that Salvini in particular has been quite visible and populist, and the government there is constantly sniping at the EU but that at the end of the day the parties in Italy will always back down because whatever discontent there is the voters remain pro EU.

    I shall have to wait for the next part to see how close to the truth that impression is.

    They don't have an argument with the EU, they have an argument with arithmetic. Since they're in the Euro and they don't have the ability to quietly steal from savers by debasing the currency, they're relying on people lending them money. If they run out of these people they'll have to stop spending. The EU rules are supposed to stop them getting to a crisis point like this, but if they ignore rules, the EU will most likely tut ineffectually and leave it to the lenders to explain to the populists how maths works.
    At what point to we say it's the lenders problem ? As long as people are stupid enough to keep lending them money, it'll go on.

    What struck me about the so called Greek bailouts, is that the money went to the northern european banks rather than the greek people. In a sane world, the banks that loaned Greece billions that it clearly couldn't afford to repay would have gone under; isn';t that how capitalism is supposed to work ?

    Longer term, the euro needs to be rebalanced some how into a V2.0 where the south isn't locked into a competitive disadvantage.
    This is about Ireland, rather than Greece, but I think it explains the key points rather well:

    https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/ireland-s-future-depends-on-breaking-free-from-bailout-1.565236
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 3,701
    ydoethur said:

    The meaningful vote has to be held by 21 January.

    Which means if it fails this week, we're out with no deal.

    I do hope the Remainers in Parliament finally come to understand this.
    No.
    *If* we No Deal (and we won’t), it will be failure of Brexiters to agree on Brexit. Likewise if we Remain.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 15,190

    kle4 said:

    And so the scene is set. I confess my general impression of Italian politics from the BBC website is that Salvini in particular has been quite visible and populist, and the government there is constantly sniping at the EU but that at the end of the day the parties in Italy will always back down because whatever discontent there is the voters remain pro EU.

    I shall have to wait for the next part to see how close to the truth that impression is.

    They don't have an argument with the EU, they have an argument with arithmetic. Since they're in the Euro and they don't have the ability to quietly steal from savers by debasing the currency, they're relying on people lending them money. If they run out of these people they'll have to stop spending. The EU rules are supposed to stop them getting to a crisis point like this, but if they ignore rules, the EU will most likely tut ineffectually and leave it to the lenders to explain to the populists how maths works.
    At what point to we say it's the lenders problem ? As long as people are stupid enough to keep lending them money, it'll go on.

    What struck me about the so called Greek bailouts, is that the money went to the northern european banks rather than the greek people. In a sane world, the banks that loaned Greece billions that it clearly couldn't afford to repay would have gone under; isn';t that how capitalism is supposed to work ?

    Longer term, the euro needs to be rebalanced some how into a V2.0 where the south isn't locked into a competitive disadvantage.
    In Italy most of said lenders are Italian savers especially pensioners. Some sort of default or restructuring could end up looking not dissimilar to a rapid version of old style devaluation.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 10,624
    Foxy said:

    Roger said:

    Foxy said:

    This is what yesterdays BMG poll looks like:



    It would be interesting to see what polling would show for Britain in the May European elections, were we to revoke A50. I haven't seen any polling on that, but my guess would be that both pro and anti EU parties would have a surge, I don't think the general public have woken up to the nastiness of UKIP under Battern and his imp, Tommy Robinson.

    A very well hung parliament.
    On yesterdays Survation it looks like this:

    A lib/Lab coalition. That'll do nicely. Under those circumstances It might even be possible to accomodate Corbyn
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 7,199
    IanB2 said:

    A great lead article, and I am looking forward to the sequel.

    The point about blowing the doors off is, of course, that the car itself stays intact.

    The empathy point is a key one. In our politics it is becoming increasingly difficult for politicians to empathise with the other side.

    I spent time travelling in northern and central Italy last autumn. People I spoke to regard Brexit with a mixture of bemusement and amusement; whatever else it has done, it has poured a bucket of cold water over any such appetite in Italy. And the migrant problem was very evident - dog walking each morning, it was very obvious how every park was full of rough sleepers and every litter bin turned out for food. It seemed to me that almost all of them were sub-Saharan rather than middle eastern.

    A question is whether its government can rise above the culture of favours and proto-corruption that pervades almost every aspect of life in Italy.

    Yes, when I was last in Italy a couple of years back the migrants were mostly Sub-Saharan. The numbers crossing are now back to 2008 figures. In part this is because of the boosting up of the Libyan Coastguard, so dingies get returned to the Libyan shore, and in part due to interdiction of the trans-Saharan smuggling routes by the EU forces. Migrants are now being returned from Libya to Niger.

    https://news.un.org/en/story/2018/10/1023512

    The Sudan situation may well affect things though. A collapse of the ruling kleptocracy there could cause chaos.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 16,641

    ydoethur said:

    The meaningful vote has to be held by 21 January.

    Which means if it fails this week, we're out with no deal.

    I do hope the Remainers in Parliament finally come to understand this.
    Baring a better deal, obviously
    So, no deal, then?

    That's the naked truth... :smile:

    By all means bookmark this post and tell me I was wrong on April 1st. Believe me I shall be very happy if I am!
  • I'm fairly sceptical about this article.

    The League has had a very good time of it in polls since the General Election, but mainly at the expense of Five Star and Forza Italia.

    Additionally, part of its success has come from softening its position on Europe from hostility to "critical friend".

    Finally, Italian politics remains volatile, and it's way too early to start thinking about this as some kind of new normal. It wasn't so long ago that Renzi had sky high ratings as a relatively new PM, but these fell away sharply.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 16,641
    Roger said:

    Foxy said:

    Roger said:

    Foxy said:

    This is what yesterdays BMG poll looks like:



    It would be interesting to see what polling would show for Britain in the May European elections, were we to revoke A50. I haven't seen any polling on that, but my guess would be that both pro and anti EU parties would have a surge, I don't think the general public have woken up to the nastiness of UKIP under Battern and his imp, Tommy Robinson.

    A very well hung parliament.
    On yesterdays Survation it looks like this:

    A lib/Lab coalition. That'll do nicely. Under those circumstances It might even be possible to accomodate Corbyn
    Hmmm.

    A phrase about being 'twice shy' springs to mind.

    I also think there would have to be a Costello figure to unite the government, and I don't see one.

    Also, let's remember there was another poll that went the other way, showing Labour falling back and the Tories getting a majority. Predictions on the next election are a fool's game right now,
  • asjohnstoneasjohnstone Posts: 1,086
    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    And so the scene is set. I confess my general impression of Italian politics from the BBC website is that Salvini in particular has been quite visible and populist, and the government there is constantly sniping at the EU but that at the end of the day the parties in Italy will always back down because whatever discontent there is the voters remain pro EU.

    I shall have to wait for the next part to see how close to the truth that impression is.

    They don't have an argument with the EU, they have an argument with arithmetic. Since they're in the Euro and they don't have the ability to quietly steal from savers by debasing the currency, they're relying on people lending them money. If they run out of these people they'll have to stop spending. The EU rules are supposed to stop them getting to a crisis point like this, but if they ignore rules, the EU will most likely tut ineffectually and leave it to the lenders to explain to the populists how maths works.
    At what point to we say it's the lenders problem ? As long as people are stupid enough to keep lending them money, it'll go on.

    What struck me about the so called Greek bailouts, is that the money went to the northern european banks rather than the greek people. In a sane world, the banks that loaned Greece billions that it clearly couldn't afford to repay would have gone under; isn';t that how capitalism is supposed to work ?

    Longer term, the euro needs to be rebalanced some how into a V2.0 where the south isn't locked into a competitive disadvantage.
    This is about Ireland, rather than Greece, but I think it explains the key points rather well:

    https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/ireland-s-future-depends-on-breaking-free-from-bailout-1.565236
    thank you, great read
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 10,459

    Lega is winning all the domestic credit at present and I expect at some point it will jettison Five Star.

    No idea what the internal dynamics are but 5-star are already doing a Nick Clegg on their promise on banking bailouts:
    http://www.tribtown.com/2019/01/08/eu-italy-banks-2/
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 7,199

    On topic: things in Italy will get really interesting when the next recession hits the Eurozone, and indeed there are some suggestions that this is already on the way.

    When Italian government debt reaches the point at which it can no longer be serviced (i.e. when the repayments get so large that raising tax and cutting spending enough to cover them becomes self-defeating through depressing economic activity,) then Italy faces a choice about what flavour of nasty medicine it takes. Will the Italian coalition choose a Greek-style EU/IMF bailout, with all the strings attached, or might it elect to leave the Euro to ease its problems through devaluation, and possibly even borrow some ideas from Iceland and unilaterally default on or restructure some of its debts?

    Is this the most recent polling on Italy leaving the Euro? it quotes keeping at 49%, leaving at 25% with the Remainder undecided. Staying in the EU itself polls a little better.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/06/04/italians-fall-love-eu-will-ever-leave/

    Clearly there is significant euroscepticism in Italy, but Italians know that a lot of their issues are internal.
  • El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 1,317
    Roger said:

    Foxy said:

    Roger said:

    Foxy said:

    This is what yesterdays BMG poll looks like:



    It would be interesting to see what polling would show for Britain in the May European elections, were we to revoke A50. I haven't seen any polling on that, but my guess would be that both pro and anti EU parties would have a surge, I don't think the general public have woken up to the nastiness of UKIP under Battern and his imp, Tommy Robinson.

    A very well hung parliament.
    On yesterdays Survation it looks like this:

    A lib/Lab coalition. That'll do nicely. Under those circumstances It might even be possible to accomodate Corbyn
    The Lib Dems will be very wary of a formal coalition. Confidence and supply, maybe.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 2,583

    Longer term, the euro needs to be rebalanced some how into a V2.0 where the south isn't locked into a competitive disadvantage.

    In normal currency areas (e.g. ours) there's a common Government, treasury and debt, and the weaker areas are at least partially compensated for having to share a currency with the stronger ones through fiscal transfers. Through UK Government spending and grant allocations, a substantial net transfer of tax revenues is effected between the different parts of the country.

    None of this exists within the Eurozone: yes, less well-off states benefit from some investment through the CAP and structural funds, but this is tiny in proportion to their overall budgets, and any large injections of cash come in the form of bailout loans rather than gifts. That might not be a problem if the Eurozone consisted only of Germany, Austria, the Netherlands and Luxembourg but, given that it in fact contains such a widely varying collection of economies, I don't see how this state of affairs can persist forever.

    That is why I think people in this country who dismiss talk of some kind of United States of Europe *might* be wrong. There is strong political resistance in the creditor states for effectively signing their taxpayers up to fund public spending in the debtor states, but there's also immense political investment in the Euro as a project. Eventually, something must give: either the Eurozone will have to adopt at least some of the characteristics of a nation state to survive in one piece, or those economies that can't live in a currency union with Germany will have to peel off. It's just a matter of which outcome wins out.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 7,199

    Roger said:

    Foxy said:

    Roger said:

    Foxy said:

    This is what yesterdays BMG poll looks like:



    It would be interesting to see what polling would show for Britain in the May European elections, were we to revoke A50. I haven't seen any polling on that, but my guess would be that both pro and anti EU parties would have a surge, I don't think the general public have woken up to the nastiness of UKIP under Battern and his imp, Tommy Robinson.

    A very well hung parliament.
    On yesterdays Survation it looks like this:

    A lib/Lab coalition. That'll do nicely. Under those circumstances It might even be possible to accomodate Corbyn
    The Lib Dems will be very wary of a formal coalition. Confidence and supply, maybe.
    No coalition, with Corbyn and I couldn't see C and S either, just support issue by issue. I suspect the SNP would take the same view. Of course that would include a #peoplesvote :)
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 15,190
    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    And so the scene is set. I confess my general impression of Italian politics from the BBC website is that Salvini in particular has been quite visible and populist, and the government there is constantly sniping at the EU but that at the end of the day the parties in Italy will always back down because whatever discontent there is the voters remain pro EU.

    I shall have to wait for the next part to see how close to the truth that impression is.

    They don't have an argument with the EU, they have an argument with arithmetic. Since they're in the Euro and they don't have the ability to quietly steal from savers by debasing the currency, they're relying on people lending them money. If they run out of these people they'll have to stop spending. The EU rules are supposed to stop them getting to a crisis point like this, but if they ignore rules, the EU will most likely tut ineffectually and leave it to the lenders to explain to the populists how maths works.
    At what point to we say it's the lenders problem ? As long as people are stupid enough to keep lending them money, it'll go on.

    What struck me about the so called Greek bailouts, is that the money went to the northern european banks rather than the greek people. In a sane world, the banks that loaned Greece billions that it clearly couldn't afford to repay would have gone under; isn';t that how capitalism is supposed to work ?

    Longer term, the euro needs to be rebalanced some how into a V2.0 where the south isn't locked into a competitive disadvantage.
    This is about Ireland, rather than Greece, but I think it explains the key points rather well:

    https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/ireland-s-future-depends-on-breaking-free-from-bailout-1.565236
    Certainly very well written and persuasive. I was in Dublin last weekend; superficially there seemed to be a lot of economic activity going on (counting the cranes, etc.), but everyone I spoke to seemed to share a mood of impending doom and, even allowing for the fact that many were taxi drivers and all were Irish, there did seem to be a lot of pessimism about, especially with Brexit to worry about as well.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 48,075
    Mr. Roger, as complacent as those who thought keeping Trotsky out would mean everything would be alright.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 23,844
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    The meaningful vote has to be held by 21 January.

    Which means if it fails this week, we're out with no deal.

    I do hope the Remainers in Parliament finally come to understand this.
    Baring a better deal, obviously
    So, no deal, then?

    That's the naked truth... :smile:

    By all means bookmark this post and tell me I was wrong on April 1st. Believe me I shall be very happy if I am!
    But you'll have some compensations. Like pointing out how Dominic Grieve's little games ensured it happened.....
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 15,190

    Longer term, the euro needs to be rebalanced some how into a V2.0 where the south isn't locked into a competitive disadvantage.

    In normal currency areas (e.g. ours) there's a common Government, treasury and debt, and the weaker areas are at least partially compensated for having to share a currency with the stronger ones through fiscal transfers. Through UK Government spending and grant allocations, a substantial net transfer of tax revenues is effected between the different parts of the country.

    None of this exists within the Eurozone: yes, less well-off states benefit from some investment through the CAP and structural funds, but this is tiny in proportion to their overall budgets, and any large injections of cash come in the form of bailout loans rather than gifts. That might not be a problem if the Eurozone consisted only of Germany, Austria, the Netherlands and Luxembourg but, given that it in fact contains such a widely varying collection of economies, I don't see how this state of affairs can persist forever.

    That is why I think people in this country who dismiss talk of some kind of United States of Europe *might* be wrong. There is strong political resistance in the creditor states for effectively signing their taxpayers up to fund public spending in the debtor states, but there's also immense political investment in the Euro as a project. Eventually, something must give: either the Eurozone will have to adopt at least some of the characteristics of a nation state to survive in one piece, or those economies that can't live in a currency union with Germany will have to peel off. It's just a matter of which outcome wins out.
    If only it were working well in either the UK or US, both of which are experiencing widening regional differentials (although there are the first signs of some regional rebalancing in the Uk property market).
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 5,294
    A Brexit UK could look very similar to a Remain UK if the democratically-elected government of the time wanted it to.

    They could agree no-tariff deals, they could introduce FOM, they could introduce minimum standards identical or even higher than the EU. So why are Remainers so incensed?

    Because they don't trust the British voters to vote the way they ought? There is a lot of this about and it's why the left learned to embrace the EU - they saw it as a way to bring in many of their policies without having to be popular.

    There are some who like the idea of a larger bloc and a no-border situation, If so, why stop at Europe? It's a reasonable view to hold. The problem for them is they are a minority and they know it.

    I suspect the first group are the largest, and that's why it's become so bitter. Democracy is only possible if people accept that others have a right to hold different views. We've become a less tolerant society but the stone-throwers don't see the glass-house they inhabit.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 16,641

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    The meaningful vote has to be held by 21 January.

    Which means if it fails this week, we're out with no deal.

    I do hope the Remainers in Parliament finally come to understand this.
    Baring a better deal, obviously
    So, no deal, then?

    That's the naked truth... :smile:

    By all means bookmark this post and tell me I was wrong on April 1st. Believe me I shall be very happy if I am!
    But you'll have some compensations. Like pointing out how Dominic Grieve's little games ensured it happened.....
    You might have that compensation. You're a Leaver. Knowing my fellow Remainers are the ones who screwed up so imposingly will make matters worse, not better.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 2,583
    Foxy said:

    On topic: things in Italy will get really interesting when the next recession hits the Eurozone, and indeed there are some suggestions that this is already on the way.

    When Italian government debt reaches the point at which it can no longer be serviced (i.e. when the repayments get so large that raising tax and cutting spending enough to cover them becomes self-defeating through depressing economic activity,) then Italy faces a choice about what flavour of nasty medicine it takes. Will the Italian coalition choose a Greek-style EU/IMF bailout, with all the strings attached, or might it elect to leave the Euro to ease its problems through devaluation, and possibly even borrow some ideas from Iceland and unilaterally default on or restructure some of its debts?

    Is this the most recent polling on Italy leaving the Euro? it quotes keeping at 49%, leaving at 25% with the Remainder undecided. Staying in the EU itself polls a little better.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/06/04/italians-fall-love-eu-will-ever-leave/

    Clearly there is significant euroscepticism in Italy, but Italians know that a lot of their issues are internal.
    Absolutely true, but by the same token they don't appear that interested in reform - probably because this would involve more of the austerity which they have so recently rejected, and possibly on a scale much greater than that which they have previously endured. All this set against the backdrop of an economy that's barely grown at all, in real terms, since the country adopted the Euro 20 years ago.

    What if they don't want to leave the Euro and they don't want to take the medicine needed to stay within it, either? Something's got to give.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 10,624
    IanB2 said:

    A great lead article, and I am looking forward to the sequel.

    The point about blowing the doors off is, of course, that the car itself stays intact.

    The empathy point is a key one. In our politics it is becoming increasingly difficult for politicians to empathise with the other side.

    I spent time travelling in northern and central Italy last autumn. People I spoke to regard Brexit with a mixture of bemusement and amusement; whatever else it has done, it has poured a bucket of cold water over any such appetite in Italy. And the migrant problem was very evident - dog walking each morning, it was very obvious how every park was full of rough sleepers and every litter bin turned out for food. It seemed to me that almost all of them were sub-Saharan rather than middle eastern.

    A question is whether its government can rise above the culture of favours and proto-corruption that pervades almost every aspect of life in Italy.

    My first job in Italy was with Fiat in Milan. I arrived a little late for a pre production meeting of maybe 20 people in a huge glass boardroom and sat down in my alloted seat between the agency producer and the production company producer neither of whom I had met before.

    After the introductions the production company producer whispered in my ear 'when they ask tell them we shot all day yesterday and it went very well'. Having just arrived from the airport this put me in an unbearable poition. The client asked me lots of questions about the shoot that hadn't happened and I looked like a gibbering idiot.

    Wecome to working in Italy!
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 48,075
    To a large extent, this is a typical message, but I thought I'd include it just for the geographical aspect:


    This may end up playing significantly in future elections.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 10,459
    CD13 said:

    A Brexit UK could look very similar to a Remain UK if the democratically-elected government of the time wanted it to.

    They could agree no-tariff deals, they could introduce FOM, they could introduce minimum standards identical or even higher than the EU. So why are Remainers so incensed?

    But have little or no control over any of them: No MEPs, no representation on the Council of Ministers, the loss of the veto on new member states joining, etc etc. I think this is actually the most likely outcome of Brexit, and in practice you're right that it wouldn't be too disastrous, but it's such a ridiculous state of affairs that I can't believe anybody actually wants it to happen, least of all the people who voted for a campaign with the slogan "take back control".

    So before doing something that's going to end up at this universally undesirable destination, we generally think it's a good idea to make sure it's what the voters really want. We can't quite do that because we only have *part* of the information about the future relationship, but even the modest compromises that TMay has already made seem to be enough to make a decent chunk of voters decide they'd rather not do the thing at all, so we generally think it would be dumb not to check with them while it's still possible for them to back out.

    At least those are the practical considerations. The emotional part, particularly for younger people, is seeing these mainly elderly, inward-looking people deliberately trying to take away opportunities from ourselves and our friends. "Take back control" means that they want control over us, and we're finding them and their worldview increasingly repulsive. We would be narked off about them trying to do this even if we knew they would fail.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 2,583
    edited January 13
    IanB2 said:

    Longer term, the euro needs to be rebalanced some how into a V2.0 where the south isn't locked into a competitive disadvantage.

    In normal currency areas (e.g. ours) there's a common Government, treasury and debt, and the weaker areas are at least partially compensated for having to share a currency with the stronger ones through fiscal transfers. Through UK Government spending and grant allocations, a substantial net transfer of tax revenues is effected between the different parts of the country.

    None of this exists within the Eurozone: yes, less well-off states benefit from some investment through the CAP and structural funds, but this is tiny in proportion to their overall budgets, and any large injections of cash come in the form of bailout loans rather than gifts. That might not be a problem if the Eurozone consisted only of Germany, Austria, the Netherlands and Luxembourg but, given that it in fact contains such a widely varying collection of economies, I don't see how this state of affairs can persist forever.

    That is why I think people in this country who dismiss talk of some kind of United States of Europe *might* be wrong. There is strong political resistance in the creditor states for effectively signing their taxpayers up to fund public spending in the debtor states, but there's also immense political investment in the Euro as a project. Eventually, something must give: either the Eurozone will have to adopt at least some of the characteristics of a nation state to survive in one piece, or those economies that can't live in a currency union with Germany will have to peel off. It's just a matter of which outcome wins out.
    If only it were working well in either the UK or US, both of which are experiencing widening regional differentials (although there are the first signs of some regional rebalancing in the Uk property market).
    All these things are relative. Social security claimants and NHS patients get the same benefits in the North-East as in the South-East. The people of the North-East aren't labouring to pay off an enormous bailout loan from the people of the South-East, either.

    I think you can reasonably argue that redistributive payments and policies within the UK don't work nearly well enough (poorer areas would benefit from infrastructure investment, tax relief and business incentives; Scotland possibly receives too much subsidy from the centre, whereas Wales certainly receives too little.) But it's a damned sight better than the situation prevailing in Euroland.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 15,190

    IanB2 said:

    Longer term, the euro needs to be rebalanced some how into a V2.0 where the south isn't locked into a competitive disadvantage.

    In normal currency areas (e.g. ours) there's a common Government, treasury and debt, and the weaker areas are at least partially compensated for having to share a currency with the stronger ones through fiscal transfers. Through UK Government spending and grant allocations, a substantial net transfer of tax revenues is effected between the different parts of the country.

    None of this exists within the Eurozone: yes, less well-off states benefit from some investment through the CAP and structural funds, but this is tiny in proportion to their overall budgets, and any large injections of cash come in the form of bailout loans rather than gifts. That might not be a problem if the Eurozone consisted only of Germany, Austria, the Netherlands and Luxembourg but, given that it in fact contains such a widely varying collection of economies, I don't see how this state of affairs can persist forever.

    That is why I think people in this country who dismiss talk of some kind of United States of Europe *might* be wrong. There is strong political resistance in the creditor states for effectively signing their taxpayers up to fund public spending in the debtor states, but there's also immense political investment in the Euro as a project. Eventually, something must give: either the Eurozone will have to adopt at least some of the characteristics of a nation state to survive in one piece, or those economies that can't live in a currency union with Germany will have to peel off. It's just a matter of which outcome wins out.
    If only it were working well in either the UK or US, both of which are experiencing widening regional differentials (although there are the first signs of some regional rebalancing in the Uk property market).
    All these things are relative. Social security claimants and NHS patients get the same benefits in the North-East as in the South-East. The people of the North-East aren't labouring to pay off an enormous bailout loan from the people of the South-East, either.

    I think you can reasonably argue that redistributive payments and policies within the UK don't work nearly well enough (poorer areas would benefit from infrastructure investment, tax relief and business incentives; Scotland possibly receives too much subsidy from the centre, whereas Wales certainly receives too little.) But it's a damned sight better than the situation prevailing in Euroland.
    Fair comment
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 2,250
    edited January 13

    To a large extent, this is a typical message, but I thought I'd include it just for the geographical aspect:



    This may end up playing significantly in future elections.

    What a shame he wasn't Brexit Secretary between 2016 and 2018. I'm sure we'd have got a much better deal had he been.
  • On topic: things in Italy will get really interesting when the next recession hits the Eurozone, and indeed there are some suggestions that this is already on the way.

    When Italian government debt reaches the point at which it can no longer be serviced (i.e. when the repayments get so large that raising tax and cutting spending enough to cover them becomes self-defeating through depressing economic activity,) then Italy faces a choice about what flavour of nasty medicine it takes. Will the Italian coalition choose a Greek-style EU/IMF bailout, with all the strings attached, or might it elect to leave the Euro to ease its problems through devaluation, and possibly even borrow some ideas from Iceland and unilaterally default on or restructure some of its debts?

    Italian workers are never going to volunteer to be paid in a devaluing lira rather than euros.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 20,936

    Foxy said:

    This is what yesterdays BMG poll looks like:



    It would be interesting to see what polling would show for Britain in the May European elections, were we to revoke A50. I haven't seen any polling on that, but my guess would be that both pro and anti EU parties would have a surge, I don't think the general public have woken up to the nastiness of UKIP under Battern and his imp, Tommy Robinson.

    Do I see large Tory loses in Scotland projected ? South Ayrshire is the obvious one but I think there are others
    They are certainly on sticky wicket there, skint and big cuts needed again and they are crap.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 23,844
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    The meaningful vote has to be held by 21 January.

    Which means if it fails this week, we're out with no deal.

    I do hope the Remainers in Parliament finally come to understand this.
    Baring a better deal, obviously
    So, no deal, then?

    That's the naked truth... :smile:

    By all means bookmark this post and tell me I was wrong on April 1st. Believe me I shall be very happy if I am!
    But you'll have some compensations. Like pointing out how Dominic Grieve's little games ensured it happened.....
    You might have that compensation. You're a Leaver. Knowing my fellow Remainers are the ones who screwed up so imposingly will make matters worse, not better.
    Take your comfort where you can.

    There'll always be the puns.....
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 48,075
    Mr. Nashe, that would be a legitimate criticism if May hadn't undercut him and his preferred option (an FTA, along Canadian lines) were on the table.
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 5,294
    Mr Edmund,

    I don't disagree with some of your points but I was trying to bring it back to basics (as that Remainer PM once said).

    Populism is an insult banded around for popular policies certain people dislike. A lovely subjective view by those who think their views are always right. We could mimic the policies and views of the EU if we wanted to, but that's no good for true Europhiles because it involve unreliable British voters. Ooh, populism, hiss, boo.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 16,641

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    The meaningful vote has to be held by 21 January.

    Which means if it fails this week, we're out with no deal.

    I do hope the Remainers in Parliament finally come to understand this.
    Baring a better deal, obviously
    So, no deal, then?

    That's the naked truth... :smile:

    By all means bookmark this post and tell me I was wrong on April 1st. Believe me I shall be very happy if I am!
    But you'll have some compensations. Like pointing out how Dominic Grieve's little games ensured it happened.....
    You might have that compensation. You're a Leaver. Knowing my fellow Remainers are the ones who screwed up so imposingly will make matters worse, not better.
    Take your comfort where you can.

    There'll always be the puns.....
    It wouldn't be a punnet, so much as a mess.

    (In case anyone is wondering, that is a reference to Richard III, Act 3 scene 4.)
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 20,936

    IanB2 said:

    Longer term, the euro needs to be rebalanced some how into a V2.0 where the south isn't locked into a competitive disadvantage.

    Snip
    None of this exists within the Eurozone: yes, less well-off states benefit from some investment through the CAP and structural funds, but this is tiny in proportion to their overall budgets, and any large injections of cash come in the form of bailout loans rather than gifts. That might not be a problem if the Eurozone consisted only of Germany, Austria, the Netherlands and Luxembourg but, given that it in fact contains such a widely varying collection of economies, I don't see how this state of affairs can persist forever.

    That is why I think people in this country who dismiss talk of some kind of United States of Europe *might* be wrong. There is strong political resistance in the creditor states for effectively signing their taxpayers up to fund public spending in the debtor states, but there's also immense political investment in the Euro as a project. Eventually, something must give: either the Eurozone will have to adopt at least some of the characteristics of a nation state to survive in one piece, or those economies that can't live in a currency union with Germany will have to peel off. It's just a matter of which outcome wins out.
    If only it were working well in either the UK or US, both of which are experiencing widening regional differentials (although there are the first signs of some regional rebalancing in the Uk property market).
    All these things are relative. Social security claimants and NHS patients get the same benefits in the North-East as in the South-East. The people of the North-East aren't labouring to pay off an enormous bailout loan from the people of the South-East, either.

    I think you can reasonably argue that redistributive payments and policies within the UK don't work nearly well enough (poorer areas would benefit from infrastructure investment, tax relief and business incentives; Scotland possibly receives too much subsidy from the centre, whereas Wales certainly receives too little.) But it's a damned sight better than the situation prevailing in Euroland.
    You are joking that Scotland gets too much. We are saddled with paying UK debt , Trident, Cross Rail , etc etc and get none of the benefits. We have been bled dry for almost 50 years and just had all powers removed because it suits some ar*ehole in London. EU looks like heaven compared to this sh**hole union.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 48,075
    Mr. G, RBS and HBOS (as was) got bailed out by the British taxpayer.

    And the pound is so magnificent the SNP, weirdly, want to keep it even should their preferred option of Scotland leaving the UK come to pass.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 2,192
    Interesting that Betfair's implied probabilities for the approval of the deal before March 30 and leaving on schedule have now diverged (previously they were very close):
    Approval of the deal: 32%
    Leaving on schedule: 23%

    The difference presumably reflects the possibility that an extension would be needed to give effect to the deal.

    The betting markets seem to think the probability of leaving with No Deal in March is very small.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 20,936
    Nicola Sturgeon is getting herself into big trouble shielding unionist civil servants who tried to stitch up Alex Salmond. She seems to have lost the plot for feminism support. Why the two unionist turkeys have not been sacked is crazy. She may be job hunting if she does not watch.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 20,936

    Mr. G, RBS and HBOS (as was) got bailed out by the British taxpayer.

    And the pound is so magnificent the SNP, weirdly, want to keep it even should their preferred option of Scotland leaving the UK come to pass.

    MD , Natwest and Halifax were bailed out. Any sensible person would have a transition period for changing from the pound also , old sad and tired arguments I am afraid.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 10,624
    edited January 13
    CD13 said:

    Mr Edmund,

    I don't disagree with some of your points but I was trying to bring it back to basics (as that Remainer PM once said).

    Populism is an insult banded around for popular policies certain people dislike. A lovely subjective view by those who think their views are always right. We could mimic the policies and views of the EU if we wanted to, but that's no good for true Europhiles because it involve unreliable British voters. Ooh, populism, hiss, boo.

    'Populism' refers to the opinions of people who don't have the ability to think. People who want blue passports..£'s shillings and pence. ....to reintroduce the Groat ....to do away with en suite bathrooms.....Sun reading thickos
  • You can't even escape Brexit at church. The prayers at 8am Communion were dominated by it. All intoned by the priest in the voice she usually reserves for serious national disasters and terrorist attacks in Wakanda or deepest Peru.

    I'd have a charity bet I was the only Remain voter in the congregation but despite that there was a just audible gasp and groan at the mention of the word " Brexit " as if to say ' not here here as well. '
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 48,075
    Mr. G, Halifax being part of HBOS, which was registered in Scotland.

    On the pound: a transition would be desirable for Scotland, claiming a right to a currency union with a nation you just left, for an indeterminate period, remains an unhealthy blend of blind optimism and arrogant complacency.

    But isn't it nice to discuss this rather than leaving the EU? See how much more civilised it is :p
  • kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 1,372
    edited January 13
    Roger said:

    CD13 said:

    Mr Edmund,

    I don't disagree with some of your points but I was trying to bring it back to basics (as that Remainer PM once said).

    Populism is an insult banded around for popular policies certain people dislike. A lovely subjective view by those who think their views are always right. We could mimic the policies and views of the EU if we wanted to, but that's no good for true Europhiles because it involve unreliable British voters. Ooh, populism, hiss, boo.

    'Populism' refers to the opinions of people who don't have the ability to think. People who want blue passports..£'s shillings and pence. ....to reintroduce the Groat ....to do away with en suite bathrooms.....Sun reading thickos
    Disgusting! I can't even believe we let those types even breathe the same air as us Guardian reading intellectuals, let alone give the bloody yobbos the right to vote. They should defer to us in all matters and be grateful for our wisdom in all things.
This discussion has been closed.