If the Tories split, the Remainer wing will have most MPs initially, and so will get to keep the name, headquarters etc. However, it will have no activists, score 10% in the polls, and would be utterly decimated at the next general election.
We would be left with about 150-200 Brexit Party MPs, facing Corbyn with a healthy majority.
I hope that’s what Soubry and Clarke want.
I doubt that they do. But they might also consider that would mean remaining (somehow, even though Corbyn has so far not switched the party policy to remain, but this scenario is about us staying and that causing a Tory split), which they regard as very good news, and at most 5 years under a terrible PM. A risk they probably do not want to take regardless, but plenty of voters probably do. Lacking that option, they can at least withdraw support from the government.
A Tory split will kill the prospect of centre-right government in this country for a generation, not just 5 years.
The fact Tory Brexiteers and pro single market campaigners are both supposedly plotting a revolt is in some respects good for May as she is currently the only Tory who can hold them together while Corbyn too is facing revolt from Remainers within his own party
May is putting me in mind of Richard Cromwell, caught between competing interests and without the strength among either to do anything about it.
Except the alternative to Richard Cromwell was Charles IInd not Jeremy Corbyn
They tried to keep the republic going after Cromwell was ousted, Monck just put a stop to that. May might be taken out by the Brexiteers, who don't want Corbyn to replace her, but they might not be able to win the day once they do take her down.
The fact Tory Brexiteers and pro single market campaigners are both supposedly plotting a revolt is in some respects good for May as she is currently the only Tory who can hold them together while Corbyn too is facing revolt from Remainers within his own party
German history suggests that two-front wars can be problematic.
I suspect that May will try to delay Commons votes until the autumn when the deal is finalised. Parliament will reject the deal, and we will have a second referendum on whether we should accept the deal or remain after all.
If the nation votes to stay, the Conservative Party will lose the 2022 election. It will not be able to motivate its supporters if Brexit is abandoned.
If Parliament rejects the deal it effectively dies, I expect in the end it will accept the deal.
May will also not call a second referendum neither will Corbyn
It would at least beinteresting to see Corbyn take a stand his supporters definitely do not like.
Corbyn was always a Brexiteer in his guts
It seems that way, yet his party and supporters seem to me to be inching toward a remain position, or at the least toward a second referendum position so that they can capitalise on Tory splits over brexit and maximise remain voting sentiment as necessary. It is totally just my own gut feeling, not based on anything, so could be way off base, but even though he probably doesn't mind Brexit happening I think he has been leader long enough to accept being pushed into a remain position if it makes him PM, and thus can at least do some things that the country needs.
Except it doesn't, at the moment he has the vast majority of Remain voters already plus 20% of 2015 UKIP voters plus Labour Leave voters voting for him, a second EU referendum would destroy that coalition
If the Tories split, the Remainer wing will have most MPs initially, and so will get to keep the name, headquarters etc. However, it will have no activists, score 10% in the polls, and would be utterly decimated at the next general election.
We would be left with about 150-200 Brexit Party MPs, facing Corbyn with a healthy majority.
I hope that’s what Soubry and Clarke want.
I doubt that they do. But they might also consider that would mean remaining (somehow, even though Corbyn has so far not switched the party policy to remain, but this scenario is about us staying and that causing a Tory split), which they regard as very good news, and at most 5 years under a terrible PM. A risk they probably do not want to take regardless, but plenty of voters probably do. Lacking that option, they can at least withdraw support from the government.
A Tory split will kill the prospect of centre-right government in this country for a generation, not just 5 years.
I doubt they would see it that way - they probably think Corbyn would be so bad that they would be in a position to recover quickly. Probably wrongly.
Certainly I think the idea sufficient numbers won't stay at home or switch (whether that makes sense or not) over a cancellation of Brexit to cause Corbyn to become PM is very naiive.
Most Tory Leavers are patriots.
They won't let Corbyn become PM.
I see that there is a back up plan concerning the Irish border worked out. Works for me:
Why should the border between a foreign country be softer than between parts of the same country?
Makes no sense, so let's file it in the 'nah, forget it' bin.
If we have to have customs checks somewhere, why not just punt it to a referendum in Northern Ireland? They can choose and the NI parties won't be able to fight too hard over the democratic result.
On May's customs partnership, I understand companies with FTAs with the UK but not the EU would pay EU tariffs upon import to the UK and then claim back the tax in the VAT system. Can someone tell me why this isn't workable?
The fact Tory Brexiteers and pro single market campaigners are both supposedly plotting a revolt is in some respects good for May as she is currently the only Tory who can hold them together while Corbyn too is facing revolt from Remainers within his own party
May is putting me in mind of Richard Cromwell, caught between competing interests and without the strength among either to do anything about it.
Except the alternative to Richard Cromwell was Charles IInd not Jeremy Corbyn
They tried to keep the republic going after Cromwell was ousted, Monck just put a stop to that. May might be taken out by the Brexiteers, who don't want Corbyn to replace her, but they might not be able to win the day once they do take her down.
30,000 posts! Well done kle4
If Parliament rejects the deal, the best option for Brexiteers is a new general election with a new PM. Even if Leave support has fallen further, it will still be high enough to have a chance of winning a majority of constituencies.
The fact Tory Brexiteers and pro single market campaigners are both supposedly plotting a revolt is in some respects good for May as she is currently the only Tory who can hold them together while Corbyn too is facing revolt from Remainers within his own party
May is putting me in mind of Richard Cromwell, caught between competing interests and without the strength among either to do anything about it.
Except the alternative to Richard Cromwell was Charles IInd not Jeremy Corbyn
They tried to keep the republic going after Cromwell was ousted, Monck just put a stop to that. May might be taken out by the Brexiteers, who don't want Corbyn to replace her, but they might not be able to win the day once they do take her down.
The fact Tory Brexiteers and pro single market campaigners are both supposedly plotting a revolt is in some respects good for May as she is currently the only Tory who can hold them together while Corbyn too is facing revolt from Remainers within his own party
German history suggests that two-front wars can be problematic.
I suspect that May will try to delay Commons votes until the autumn when the deal is finalised. Parliament will reject the deal, and we will have a second referendum on whether we should accept the deal or remain after all.
If the nation votes to stay, the Conservative Party will lose the 2022 election. It will not be able to motivate its supporters if Brexit is abandoned.
If Parliament rejects the deal it effectively dies, I expect in the end it will accept the deal.
May will also not call a second referendum neither will Corbyn
It would at least beinteresting to see Corbyn take a stand his supporters definitely do not like.
Corbyn was always a Brexiteer in his guts
It seems that way, yet his party and supporters seem to me to be inching toward a remain position, or at the least toward a second referendum position so that they can capitalise on Tory splits over brexit and maximise remain voting sentiment as necessary. It is totally just my own gut feeling, not based on anything, so could be way off base, but even though he probably doesn't mind Brexit happening I think he has been leader long enough to accept being pushed into a remain position if it makes him PM, and thus can at least do some things that the country needs.
Except it doesn't, at the moment he has the vast majority of Remain voters already plus 20% of 2015 UKIP voters plus Labour Leave voters voting for him, a second EU referendum would destroy that coalition
You're probably right, but Labour members are really, really against Brexit, and they love Corbyn and he loves them, I can see him switching position eventually, and hoping Tory splits enable him to get through despite any hits to his own coalition.
If the Tories split, the Remainer wing will have most MPs initially, and so will get to keep the name, headquarters etc. However, it will have no activists, score 10% in the polls, and would be utterly decimated at the next general election.
We would be left with about 150-200 Brexit Party MPs, facing Corbyn with a healthy majority.
I hope that’s what Soubry and Clarke want.
I doubt that they do. But they might also consider that would mean remaining (somehow, even though Corbyn has so far not switched the party policy to remain, but this scenario is about us staying and that causing a Tory split), which they regard as very good news, and at most 5 years under a terrible PM. A risk they probably do not want to take regardless, but plenty of voters probably do. Lacking that option, they can at least withdraw support from the government.
A Tory split will kill the prospect of centre-right government in this country for a generation, not just 5 years.
I doubt they would see it that way - they probably think Corbyn would be so bad that they would be in a position to recover quickly. Probably wrongly.
Not necessarily, after Hollande won on a left-wing platform in France in 2012 he soon polled so badly it looked like a Les Republicains landslide in 2017 until the Blairite Macron usurped him as the centre left candidate
The fact Tory Brexiteers and pro single market campaigners are both supposedly plotting a revolt is in some respects good for May as she is currently the only Tory who can hold them together while Corbyn too is facing revolt from Remainers within his own party
May is putting me in mind of Richard Cromwell, caught between competing interests and without the strength among either to do anything about it.
Except the alternative to Richard Cromwell was Charles IInd not Jeremy Corbyn
They tried to keep the republic going after Cromwell was ousted, Monck just put a stop to that. May might be taken out by the Brexiteers, who don't want Corbyn to replace her, but they might not be able to win the day once they do take her down.
30,000 posts! Well done kle4
Damn, should have made more of an effort to mark the occasion.
The fact Tory Brexiteers and pro single market campaigners are both supposedly plotting a revolt is in some respects good for May as she is currently the only Tory who can hold them together while Corbyn too is facing revolt from Remainers within his own party
May is putting me in mind of Richard Cromwell, caught between competing interests and without the strength among either to do anything about it.
Except the alternative to Richard Cromwell was Charles IInd not Jeremy Corbyn
They tried to keep the republic going after Cromwell was ousted, Monck just put a stop to that. May might be taken out by the Brexiteers, who don't want Corbyn to replace her, but they might not be able to win the day once they do take her down.
The fact Tory Brexiteers and pro single market campaigners are both supposedly plotting a revolt is in some respects good for May as she is currently the only Tory who can hold them together while Corbyn too is facing revolt from Remainers within his own party
German history suggests that two-front wars can be problematic.
I suspect that May will try to delay Commons votes until the autumn when the deal is finalised. Parliament will reject the deal, and we will have a second referendum on whether we should accept the deal or remain after all.
If the nation votes to stay, the Conservative Party will lose the 2022 election. It will not be able to motivate its supporters if Brexit is abandoned.
If Parliament rejects the deal it effectively dies, I expect in the end it will accept the deal.
May will also not call a second referendum neither will Corbyn
It would at least beinteresting to see Corbyn take a stand his supporters definitely do not like.
Corbyn was always a Brexiteer in his guts
It seems that way, yet his party and supporters seem to me to be inching toward a remain position, or at the least toward a second referendum position so that they can capitalise on Tory splits over brexit and maximise remain voting sentiment as necessary. It is totally just my own gut feeling, not based on anything, so could be way off base, but even though he probably doesn't mind Brexit happening I think he has been leader long enough to accept being pushed into a remain position if it makes him PM, and thus can at least do some things that the country needs.
Except it doesn't, at the moment he has the vast majority of Remain voters already plus 20% of 2015 UKIP voters plus Labour Leave voters voting for him, a second EU referendum would destroy that coalition
You're probably right, but Labour members are really, really against Brexit, and they love Corbyn and he loves them, I can see him switching position eventually, and hoping Tory splits enable him to get through despite any hits to his own coalition.
As I said in his guts he is a Brexiteer and his present coalition is the best means of getting 40%+ for a socialist government free of EU directives and regulations promoting the free market
While the government has been obsessing over the customs union battle, Tory rebels have been building numbers behind keeping U.K. in single market - they say they’ve got enough to pass an amendment....
...but it’s not going to happen if Labour don’t back it...
...rebels in both the Lords and Commons are warning Corbyn he is going to spark a major internal row unless he supports the single market...
...a time was always going to come when Corbyn would have to answer to his pro-EU membership - that time just came closer.
If you're seeing it in the papers, then the maths doesn't work.
We've seen plenty in the papers from agitators on both sides of the debate, frankly, so who knows what's going on. We know for a fact the Cabinet is still not united on a way forward, and if that is the case, I'd say the odds are good May does not have the numbers to dictate any way forward, in which case the rebels might well have a chance
Labor are at 40% in the opinion poles at got 35% NVE last week partly because some people like Corbyn, but also Because May and Cable are so uttaly uninspiring. A new party with a clear message, no party baggage and a reasonably charismatic leader and who knows.
Anything is possible, but I don't think lack of party baggage is a positive thing. People often think it would be, but it isn't only FPTP that makes it difficult for new parties to break through, it's the attachment even normal people have to our political tribes. I've known non-voters still describe themselves in terms of party support. Besides, we had a party with a clear message (on Brexit at least) and a reasonably charismatic leader, and it managed to pressure the main parties, but not break through.
All good points, but I think now that Brexit has been voted for, the sense of betrayal that many Leave have/would have if Brexit is/would be more deeply felt.
Farage had some charisma, but he put off almost as many are he attracted, even amusing the pro Leave side, which is partly why the official leave campaign tried to distance themselves from him, I don't think JRM has the same impact.
FPTP complicates thinks, but I think he the New Leave Party started with 50 or so MPs then people will have less reluctance to vote for them, on the 'I don't what to wast my vote' attitude.
As I said in his guts he is a Brexiteer and his present coalition is the best means of getting 40%+ for a socialist government free of EU directives and regulations promoting the free market
He's been growing as a politician. He spins, he compromises. Ultimately he will make the same choices of all party leaders, to compromise some principles so that he can at least do some of the things he wants. Will he even get the opportunity? Not likely, but the chance is increasing. Will he definitely compromise over this issue, and not some other? No, not definitely. But he can only do what he wants if he takes the party with him. He has done so very well so far, but there is a chance, and I stress only a chance, that he cannot on this one, and will let himself be guided instead, if that is what it takes.
The fact Tory Brexiteers and pro single market campaigners are both supposedly plotting a revolt is in some respects good for May as she is currently the only Tory who can hold them together while Corbyn too is facing revolt from Remainers within his own party
German history suggests that two-front wars can be problematic.
I suspect that May will try to delay Commons votes until the autumn when the deal is finalised. Parliament will reject the deal, and we will have a second referendum on whether we should accept the deal or remain after all.
If the nation votes to stay, the Conservative Party will lose the 2022 election. It will not be able to motivate its supporters if Brexit is abandoned.
If Parliament rejects the deal it effectively dies, I expect in the end it will accept the deal.
May will also not call a second referendum neither will Corbyn
It would at least beinteresting to see Corbyn take a stand his supporters definitely do not like.
Corbyn was always a Brexiteer in his guts
It seems that way, yet his party and supporters seem to me to be inching toward a remain position, or at the least toward a second referendum position so that they can capitalise on Tory splits over brexit and maximise remain voting sentiment as necessary. It is totally just my own gut feeling, not based on anything, so could be way off base, but even though he probably doesn't mind Brexit happening I think he has been leader long enough to accept being pushed into a remain position if it makes him PM, and thus can at least do some things that the country needs.
Except it doesn't, at the moment he has the vast majority of Remain voters already plus 20% of 2015 UKIP voters plus Labour Leave voters voting for him, a second EU referendum would destroy that coalition
You're probably right, but Labour members are really, really against Brexit, and they love Corbyn and he loves them, I can see him switching position eventually, and hoping Tory splits enable him to get through despite any hits to his own coalition.
As I said in his guts he is a Brexiteer and his present coalition is the best means of getting 40%+ for a socialist government free of EU directives and regulations promoting the free market
The optimal result for Jezza is that we leave everything but the Tories are so badly damaged by it that they split and he comes through the middle.
If the Tories split, the Remainer wing will have most MPs initially, and so will get to keep the name, headquarters etc. However, it will have no activists, score 10% in the polls, and would be utterly decimated at the next general election.
We would be left with about 150-200 Brexit Party MPs, facing Corbyn with a healthy majority.
I hope that’s what Soubry and Clarke want.
I doubt that they do. But they might also consider that would mean remaining (somehow, even though Corbyn has so far not switched the party policy to remain, but this scenario is about us staying and that causing a Tory split), which they regard as very good news, and at most 5 years under a terrible PM. A risk they probably do not want to take regardless, but plenty of voters probably do. Lacking that option, they can at least withdraw support from the government.
A Tory split will kill the prospect of centre-right government in this country for a generation, not just 5 years.
May is a Socialist, so I don't see the difference.
She strips us of both our personal liberty's and economic freedom. at lest with a a JRM party we stand a change of something worth having, rather than the least bad of 2 altoratareans.
Certainly I think the idea sufficient numbers won't stay at home or switch (whether that makes sense or not) over a cancellation of Brexit to cause Corbyn to become PM is very naiive.
Most Tory Leavers are patriots.
They won't let Corbyn become PM.
I see that there is a back up plan concerning the Irish border worked out. Works for me:
As I said in his guts he is a Brexiteer and his present coalition is the best means of getting 40%+ for a socialist government free of EU directives and regulations promoting the free market
He's been growing as a politician. He spins, he compromises. Ultimately he will make the same choices of all party leaders, to compromise some principles so that he can at least do some of the things he wants. Will he even get the opportunity? Not likely, but the chance is increasing. Will he definitely compromise over this issue, and not some other? No, not definitely. But he can only do what he wants if he takes the party with him. He has done so very well so far, but there is a chance, and I stress only a chance, that he cannot on this one, and will let himself be guided instead, if that is what it takes.
Corbyn is an ideologue above all else, he has no interest in being PM if he cannot implement the agenda he wants
If the Tories split, the Remainer wing will have most MPs initially, and so will get to keep the name, headquarters etc. However, it will have no activists, score 10% in the polls, and would be utterly decimated at the next general election.
We would be left with about 150-200 Brexit Party MPs, facing Corbyn with a healthy majority.
I hope that’s what Soubry and Clarke want.
I doubt that they do. But they might also consider that would mean remaining (somehow, even though Corbyn has so far not switched the party policy to remain, but this scenario is about us staying and that causing a Tory split), which they regard as very good news, and at most 5 years under a terrible PM. A risk they probably do not want to take regardless, but plenty of voters probably do. Lacking that option, they can at least withdraw support from the government.
A Tory split will kill the prospect of centre-right government in this country for a generation, not just 5 years.
May is a Socialist, so I don't see the difference.
She strips us of both our personal liberty's and economic freedom. at lest with a a JRM party we stand a change of something worth having, rather than the least bad of 2 altoratareans.
She is a Christian Democrat and probably closer ideologically to the average voter than either Corbyn or JRM as would quickly be seen in the polls if either got to No 10
As I said in his guts he is a Brexiteer and his present coalition is the best means of getting 40%+ for a socialist government free of EU directives and regulations promoting the free market
He's been growing as a politician. He spins, he compromises. Ultimately he will make the same choices of all party leaders, to compromise some principles so that he can at least do some of the things he wants. Will he even get the opportunity? Not likely, but the chance is increasing. Will he definitely compromise over this issue, and not some other? No, not definitely. But he can only do what he wants if he takes the party with him. He has done so very well so far, but there is a chance, and I stress only a chance, that he cannot on this one, and will let himself be guided instead, if that is what it takes.
Corbyn is an ideologue above all else, he has no interest in being PM if he cannot implement the agenda he wants
You ignore that he has already stated, against what many believe to be him his personal beliefs, that he voted Remain in the referendum. He's also moved the party position from no CU to a CU. The idea that he would ultimately choose to abandon the chance to implement most of what he wants if he cannot implement all of what he wants, is, dare I say it, rather naiive in assuming that this professional politician, who has been leader for years now, will not have learned the lesson to accept he cannot get everything, but most of what he wants is better than none of what he wants. You are taking at face value the pronouncements of his supporters that he never abandons his principles. I can believe it would take more for him to do so than many other politicians. The chance to do a lot of good, as PM, is always enough to do it though.
If the Tories split, the Remainer wing will have most MPs initially, and so will get to keep the name, headquarters etc. However, it will have no activists, score 10% in the polls, and would be utterly decimated at the next general election.
We would be left with about 150-200 Brexit Party MPs, facing Corbyn with a healthy majority.
I hope that’s what Soubry and Clarke want.
This is fantasy because enough of the key Brexit figures will be with them, and it will be brutally apparent that anyone who spent years of their life believing that Daniel Hannan had the answers has been wasting their time.
Brexit has as much future as the empire did after the Second World War.
Inspired by the last thread I decided to calculate the LibDem proportion of the combined Con+Lab+LibDem vote percentage in each round of local elections, disregarding those years when a general election was held on the same day:
So during the Blair / Brown governments the LibDems had an average of 29% of the three party share, it reduced to 19% while they were in government and has only increased to 20% subsequently.
As I said in his guts he is a Brexiteer and his present coalition is the best means of getting 40%+ for a socialist government free of EU directives and regulations promoting the free market
He's been growing as a politician. He spins, he compromises. Ultimately he will make the same choices of all party leaders, to compromise some principles so that he can at least do some of the things he wants. Will he even get the opportunity? Not likely, but the chance is increasing. Will he definitely compromise over this issue, and not some other? No, not definitely. But he can only do what he wants if he takes the party with him. He has done so very well so far, but there is a chance, and I stress only a chance, that he cannot on this one, and will let himself be guided instead, if that is what it takes.
Corbyn is an ideologue above all else, he has no interest in being PM if he cannot implement the agenda he wants
You ignore that he has already stated, against what many believe to be him his personal beliefs, that he voted Remain in the referendum. He's also moved the party position from no CU to a CU. The idea that he would ultimately choose to abandon the chance to implement most of what he wants if he cannot implement all of what he wants, is, dare I say it, rather naiive in assuming that this professional politician, who has been leader for years now, will not have learned the lesson to accept he cannot get everything, but most of what he wants is better than none of what he wants. You are taking at face value the pronouncements of his supporters that he never abandons his principles. I can believe it would take more for him to do so than many other politicians. The chance to do a lot of good, as PM, is always enough to do it though.
Good night all.
He says that, in the ballot box who knows what he voted.
He has not committed to the Customs Union, just a Customs Union and he has committed to end free movement, crucial to Labour Leave voters and to leave the single market to stop restrictions on his socialist agenda.
As I said in his guts he is a Brexiteer and his present coalition is the best means of getting 40%+ for a socialist government free of EU directives and regulations promoting the free market
He's been growing as a politician. He spins, he compromises. Ultimately he will make the same choices of all party leaders, to compromise some principles so that he can at least do some of the things he wants. Will he even get the opportunity? Not likely, but the chance is increasing. Will he definitely compromise over this issue, and not some other? No, not definitely. But he can only do what he wants if he takes the party with him. He has done so very well so far, but there is a chance, and I stress only a chance, that he cannot on this one, and will let himself be guided instead, if that is what it takes.
Corbyn is an ideologue above all else, he has no interest in being PM if he cannot implement the agenda he wants
You ignore that he has already stated, against what many believe to be him his personal beliefs, that he voted Remain in the referendum. He's also moved the party position from no CU to a CU. The idea that he would ultimately choose to abandon the chance to implement most of what he wants if he cannot implement all of what he wants, is, dare I say it, rather naiive in assuming that this professional politician, who has been leader for years now, will not have learned the lesson to accept he cannot get everything, but most of what he wants is better than none of what he wants. You are taking at face value the pronouncements of his supporters that he never abandons his principles. I can believe it would take more for him to do so than many other politicians. The chance to do a lot of good, as PM, is always enough to do it though.
Good night all.
He says that, in the ballot box who knows what he voted.
He has not committed to the Customs Union, just a Customs Union and he has committed to end free movement, crucial to Labour Leave voters and to leave the single market to stop restrictions on his socialist agenda.
He seems very bothered by the whole process, and could never be accused of pandering to the voters. He would have more room for manouvre on economic policy in Credit Britain, but is not bothered much by trade or immigration. Anti-austerity and anti-interventionism is far more important.
If the Tories split, the Remainer wing will have most MPs initially, and so will get to keep the name, headquarters etc. However, it will have no activists, score 10% in the polls, and would be utterly decimated at the next general election.
We would be left with about 150-200 Brexit Party MPs, facing Corbyn with a healthy majority.
I hope that’s what Soubry and Clarke want.
I doubt that they do. But they might also consider that would mean remaining (somehow, even though Corbyn has so far not switched the party policy to remain, but this scenario is about us staying and that causing a Tory split), which they regard as very good news, and at most 5 years under a terrible PM. A risk they probably do not want to take regardless, but plenty of voters probably do. Lacking that option, they can at least withdraw support from the government.
A Tory split will kill the prospect of centre-right government in this country for a generation, not just 5 years.
May is a Socialist, so I don't see the difference.
She strips us of both our personal liberty's and economic freedom. at lest with a a JRM party we stand a change of something worth having, rather than the least bad of 2 altoratareans.
She is a Christian Democrat and probably closer ideologically to the average voter than either Corbyn or JRM as would quickly be seen in the polls if either got to No 10
I think she is much more 'government under me know best' that the German Christian democrats. bt thats my opinion.
in some ways her opinions will be in line with the average voter, but I think a lot of her popularats such as it is, is based on:
She is implemtion, sort off a policy that many are very defenseive about (BREXIT)
Some people are tryble Torys, and will always be loyal to the leader.
She is not Corbyn.
Beyond that I don't see any affection for her, any appreciation of her skills, admiration of her integrity, or any deep understanding of her Philosophy/ideology.
As I said in his guts he is a Brexiteer and his present coalition is the best means of getting 40%+ for a socialist government free of EU directives and regulations promoting the free market
He's been growing as a politician. He spins, he compromises. Ultimately he will make the same choices of all party leaders, to compromise some principles so that he can at least do some of the things he wants. Will he even get the opportunity? Not likely, but the chance is increasing. Will he definitely compromise over this issue, and not some other? No, not definitely. But he can only do what he wants if he takes the party with him. He has done so very well so far, but there is a chance, and I stress only a chance, that he cannot on this one, and will let himself be guided instead, if that is what it takes.
Corbyn is an ideologue above all else, he has no interest in being PM if he cannot implement the agenda he wants
You ignore that he has already stated, against what many believe to be him his personal beliefs, that he voted Remain in the referendum. He's also moved the party position from no CU to a CU. The idea that he would ultimately choose to abandon the chance to implement most of what he wants if he cannot implement all of what he wants, is, dare I say it, rather naiive in assuming that this professional politician, who has been leader for years now, will not have learned the lesson to accept he cannot get everything, but most of what he wants is better than none of what he wants. You are taking at face value the pronouncements of his supporters that he never abandons his principles. I can believe it would take more for him to do so than many other politicians. The chance to do a lot of good, as PM, is always enough to do it though.
Good night all.
He says that, in the ballot box who knows what he voted.
He has not committed to the Customs Union, just a Customs Union and he has committed to end free movement, crucial to Labour Leave voters and to leave the single market to stop restrictions on his socialist agenda.
He seems very bothered by the whole process, and could never be accused of pandering to the voters. He would have more room for manouvre on economic policy in Credit Britain, but is not bothered much by trade or immigration. Anti-austerity and anti-interventionism is far more important.
The EU will not allow anti austerity politics much leeway either if it leads to big deficits, ask Alexis Tsipras
You ignore that he has already stated, against what many believe to be him his personal beliefs, that he voted Remain in the referendum. He's also moved the party position from no CU to a CU. The idea that he would ultimately choose to abandon the chance to implement most of what he wants if he cannot implement all of what he wants, is, dare I say it, rather naiive in assuming that this professional politician, who has been leader for years now, will not have learned the lesson to accept he cannot get everything, but most of what he wants is better than none of what he wants. You are taking at face value the pronouncements of his supporters that he never abandons his principles. I can believe it would take more for him to do so than many other politicians. The chance to do a lot of good, as PM, is always enough to do it though.
Good night all.
I think that's right - after all, he's waived several views already (Trident, republicanism). As Foxy says, his bottom lines are non-austerity and non-interventionism; he'll compromise on other things as needed to win a majority.
But super-Europhiles like me and those peers are making a mistake if we think he'll switch policy just to suit us. Forcing us into the EEA sounds a good idea to me, but it would alienate a good many Labour voters, probably more than would be attracted.
Certainly I think the idea sufficient numbers won't stay at home or switch (whether that makes sense or not) over a cancellation of Brexit to cause Corbyn to become PM is very naiive.
Most Tory Leavers are patriots.
They won't let Corbyn become PM.
I see that there is a back up plan concerning the Irish border worked out. Works for me:
Certainly I think the idea sufficient numbers won't stay at home or switch (whether that makes sense or not) over a cancellation of Brexit to cause Corbyn to become PM is very naiive.
Most Tory Leavers are patriots.
They won't let Corbyn become PM.
I see that there is a back up plan concerning the Irish border worked out. Works for me:
Any Tory MP in a Leave constituency who fails to back leaving the single market risks de selection by their Tory Association
Most MPs have a pretty good idea what their constituency associations will accept - for instance, Soubry is certainly not at risk from Broxtowe Conservative Party. And some are retiring anyway, like Clarke - not that he'd defer meekly to his party anyway.
While the government has been obsessing over the customs union battle, Tory rebels have been building numbers behind keeping U.K. in single market - they say they’ve got enough to pass an amendment....
...but it’s not going to happen if Labour don’t back it...
...rebels in both the Lords and Commons are warning Corbyn he is going to spark a major internal row unless he supports the single market...
...a time was always going to come when Corbyn would have to answer to his pro-EU membership - that time just came closer.
If I were May I would play for time and then put the hammer down with a second referendum.
What if it produces the same result as the first referendum?
Then the voters just endorsed whatever deal TMay has negotiated, works for her.
Why should the border between a foreign country be softer than between parts of the same country?
Makes no sense, so let's file it in the 'nah, forget it' bin.
For enclaves and exclaves, and Minnesota's Northwest Angle, it actually happens.
But these geographical oddities: (a) don't have the DUP, and (b) are rarely more than a few tens of thousands of people.
The plan set out is a very poor idea, mainly because it is based around giving into the EU and their desire to lock us into SM regulations and also splitting off NI from the UK.
However, an idea that might work and would probably be acceptable to the DUP at a push is to introduce the MaxFac border in NI as planned, but then double up by re-checking compliance in Irish Sea. So if goods come from ROI to NI, there needs to be an electronic declaration in advance before crossing the border. Say 1% of these (on a risk basis) are told they need to go to a customs post away from the border for inspection. If goods cross the Irish sea, the same system is used, but goods that are 'intra-uk' (eg comply with UK rules of origin and are not planning to leave the UK) are automatically cleared. However, if goods come into the UK from abroad, if they cross the Irish sea they would need to be electronically tracked and cleared (and the same for goods that start in ROI that enter NI and then cross to the UK). This way the same goods can be tracked again if they cross the NI border later and tariffs etc applied if required.
Under this approach, NI has exactly the same regulatory rules as the UK but the inability to have too much checking at the NI border is addressed by having subsequent checks at the Irish Sea. The 'leakage' from this would be no worse than any other border - remember that 98% of goods are never inspected at the moment.
The big advantage would be that there would be no need to follow SM regulations. As with other FTAs, both sides agree which goods they accept 'regulatory equivalence' on and these are cleared electronically with tariffs charged if required. But if regulations on any class of goods diverge then these goods will need to be routed via inspection points away from the border. This can be done in the UK for goods before they cross the Irish sea with an onward transit approval over the NI border that would then trigger tariffs.
There has never really been an issue coming up with a solution to the NI border - the point is that this is about politically trying to force the UK to remain aligned and nothing to do with practicalities.
Certainly I think the idea sufficient numbers won't stay at home or switch (whether that makes sense or not) over a cancellation of Brexit to cause Corbyn to become PM is very naiive.
Most Tory Leavers are patriots.
They won't let Corbyn become PM.
I see that there is a back up plan concerning the Irish border worked out. Works for me:
Why should the border between a foreign country be softer than between parts of the same country?
Makes no sense, so let's file it in the 'nah, forget it' bin.
If we have to have customs checks somewhere, why not just punt it to a referendum in Northern Ireland? They can choose and the NI parties won't be able to fight too hard over the democratic result.
On May's customs partnership, I understand companies with FTAs with the UK but not the EU would pay EU tariffs upon import to the UK and then claim back the tax in the VAT system. Can someone tell me why this isn't workable?
Read the ERG report which tears it to shreds. The main issues are:
1. It is far too complex and expensive to pay tariffs and have to claim them back later. The risk is that companies will just pay the CET and pass on the cost to the consumer, because the admin cost of the rebate will be too high. 2. As a result, the incentive to change tariffs in any areas will be low and the pressure will be to keep them aligned - basically ending up as a CU anyway. So doing other trade deals will be almost impossible. 3. The plan doesn't solve the NI border 'problem', because the next issue will be that we have to agree to follow SM regulations to avoid inspections (Robbins is already promising this to the EU). So we will just get locked into EU rules and virtually all CU tariffs with no say and, of course ECJ Jurisdiction. Not exactly taking back control.
That is the reason the remainers like it so much - it is basically a way of achieving BRINO.
Certainly I think the idea sufficient numbers won't stay at home or switch (whether that makes sense or not) over a cancellation of Brexit to cause Corbyn to become PM is very naiive.
Most Tory Leavers are patriots.
They won't let Corbyn become PM.
I see that there is a back up plan concerning the Irish border worked out. Works for me:
The obvious solution is a United Ireland. Offer that to Varadkar without a referendum. See Ireland back down instantly.
Dublin would jump at the chance of a united Ireland. It is pure fantasy to imagine they'd not be prepared to take an economic hit -- look at Germany, for instance, or even Brexit. In any case, Europe will help foot the bill.
Any Tory MP in a Leave constituency who fails to back leaving the single market risks de selection by their Tory Association
Most MPs have a pretty good idea what their constituency associations will accept - for instance, Soubry is certainly not at risk from Broxtowe Conservative Party. And some are retiring anyway, like Clarke - not that he'd defer meekly to his party anyway.
Is he even a member? Wasn't it Ken Clarke who was found, when standing for the leadership, not actually to have joined the party in the first place? Or am I mixing him up with someone else?
Comments
On May's customs partnership, I understand companies with FTAs with the UK but not the EU would pay EU tariffs upon import to the UK and then claim back the tax in the VAT system. Can someone tell me why this isn't workable?
http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/20573/lets-talk-about-this-rumor-that-israeli-f-15s-mimicked-us-jets-to-strike-at-iran-in-syria
If Parliament rejects the deal, the best option for Brexiteers is a new general election with a new PM. Even if Leave support has fallen further, it will still be high enough to have a chance of winning a majority of constituencies.
It could also put Corbyn in 4 years early.
I think an AV thread might be around the corner.
Farage had some charisma, but he put off almost as many are he attracted, even amusing the pro Leave side, which is partly why the official leave campaign tried to distance themselves from him, I don't think JRM has the same impact.
FPTP complicates thinks, but I think he the New Leave Party started with 50 or so MPs then people will have less reluctance to vote for them, on the 'I don't what to wast my vote' attitude.
but it is all hypotetical
She strips us of both our personal liberty's and economic freedom. at lest with a a JRM party we stand a change of something worth having, rather than the least bad of 2 altoratareans.
Good night all.
Brexit has as much future as the empire did after the Second World War.
The biggest news though is Sajid Javid jumps to third with 10% after being appointed Home Secretary
https://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2018/05/our-next-tory-leader-survey-rees-mogg-leads-gove-by-two-votes-in-over-a-thousand.html
2018 19%
2017 22%
2016 20%
2014 18%
2013 21%
2012 19%
2011 17%
2009 31%
2008 27%
2007 28%
2006 28%
2004 30%
2003 32%
2002 29%
2000 30%
1999 26%
1998 26%
So during the Blair / Brown governments the LibDems had an average of 29% of the three party share, it reduced to 19% while they were in government and has only increased to 20% subsequently.
He has not committed to the Customs Union, just a Customs Union and he has committed to end free movement, crucial to Labour Leave voters and to leave the single market to stop restrictions on his socialist agenda.
in some ways her opinions will be in line with the average voter, but I think a lot of her popularats such as it is, is based on:
She is implemtion, sort off a policy that many are very defenseive about (BREXIT)
Some people are tryble Torys, and will always be loyal to the leader.
She is not Corbyn.
Beyond that I don't see any affection for her, any appreciation of her skills, admiration of her integrity, or any deep understanding of her Philosophy/ideology.
But super-Europhiles like me and those peers are making a mistake if we think he'll switch policy just to suit us. Forcing us into the EEA sounds a good idea to me, but it would alienate a good many Labour voters, probably more than would be attracted.
But these geographical oddities: (a) don't have the DUP, and (b) are rarely more than a few tens of thousands of people.
However, an idea that might work and would probably be acceptable to the DUP at a push is to introduce the MaxFac border in NI as planned, but then double up by re-checking compliance in Irish Sea. So if goods come from ROI to NI, there needs to be an electronic declaration in advance before crossing the border. Say 1% of these (on a risk basis) are told they need to go to a customs post away from the border for inspection. If goods cross the Irish sea, the same system is used, but goods that are 'intra-uk' (eg comply with UK rules of origin and are not planning to leave the UK) are automatically cleared. However, if goods come into the UK from abroad, if they cross the Irish sea they would need to be electronically tracked and cleared (and the same for goods that start in ROI that enter NI and then cross to the UK). This way the same goods can be tracked again if they cross the NI border later and tariffs etc applied if required.
Under this approach, NI has exactly the same regulatory rules as the UK but the inability to have too much checking at the NI border is addressed by having subsequent checks at the Irish Sea. The 'leakage' from this would be no worse than any other border - remember that 98% of goods are never inspected at the moment.
The big advantage would be that there would be no need to follow SM regulations. As with other FTAs, both sides agree which goods they accept 'regulatory equivalence' on and these are cleared electronically with tariffs charged if required. But if regulations on any class of goods diverge then these goods will need to be routed via inspection points away from the border. This can be done in the UK for goods before they cross the Irish sea with an onward transit approval over the NI border that would then trigger tariffs.
There has never really been an issue coming up with a solution to the NI border - the point is that this is about politically trying to force the UK to remain aligned and nothing to do with practicalities.
1. It is far too complex and expensive to pay tariffs and have to claim them back later. The risk is that companies will just pay the CET and pass on the cost to the consumer, because the admin cost of the rebate will be too high.
2. As a result, the incentive to change tariffs in any areas will be low and the pressure will be to keep them aligned - basically ending up as a CU anyway. So doing other trade deals will be almost impossible.
3. The plan doesn't solve the NI border 'problem', because the next issue will be that we have to agree to follow SM regulations to avoid inspections (Robbins is already promising this to the EU). So we will just get locked into EU rules and virtually all CU tariffs with no say and, of course ECJ Jurisdiction. Not exactly taking back control.
That is the reason the remainers like it so much - it is basically a way of achieving BRINO.