Half an hour in to PMQ's and still no questions about today's vote.
Theresa's won it hasn't she?
It certainly looks that way. In asking for the power to reverse the public vote, Grieve showed his true colours and his true agenda. He is a repulsive Brussels apologist who disgraces our party and our country.
I don’t like to get personal. But, really, Max: do grow up. Grieve is a distinguished thoughtful lawyer and Parliamentarian, who has been a loss to the Cabinet, and who is trying to do the best for his country as he sees it. He may be wrong. But he is not a repulsive apologist or traitor and he disgraces no-one. Your post, on the other hand.....
The single thing I hate most aboue” abuse.
+1. I get very tired of personal abuse on both sides on this debate. It really doesn't help.
And me
The single most important fact in British politics today is that the EU referendum was won with xenophobic lies. I'm not going to enter into some form of self-denying ordinance in pointing this out. It underpins most of current politics in one way or another. An extreme allergy to the x word is something that others are just going to have to get an epipen for.
You are just a bitter elitist who thinks his little cultural tribe is superior to others who live outside Zone 2 and is so blinded by his pretension he doesn't even realise Londoners are the unhappiest people in the country.
I'm comfortable being criticised by a man who thinks that a man's racial history is a valid reason for questioning his integrity. Since I now live in the countryside, you can't even nail one basic fact to hang your insult on.
I hope the move went well. I am planning a similar move in the course of the next year or so. When I think of all that is involved, I need a lie down.......
I too am moving to the country. It's interesting how many people try to escape over congested cramped London once they can afford to, isn't it?
I think the EU might be better disposed to us if a) we knew what we wanted and presented it to them, on the assumption that we are also aware of the rules of the EU as they stand; and b) if we didn't call people traitors who dissent from today's particular government line (whatever that happens to be day in day out).
I don't mean you, I mean our national media and senior politicians. As has been pointed out, the EU can use social and traditional media and when the most popular news website on the planet uses such terminology it is entirely understandable that they are suitably on guard.
They are pushing their advantage as we are trying to push ours.
If the government was trying to push it's advantage it would start the process of locking EU nations and companies out of London's capital markets.
I'm not sure that's a very sensible idea. Ultimately, London is just one financial centre, and there are others - such as New York.
Also, the people that make up the capital markets in London are fundamentally mobile. There is massive factory, there are a bunch of people with phones and computers, who can get on planes and move elsewhere.
Why do the big Uuuuge buildings costing millions need to be built if it all can be done with a laptop and a phone ?
Lordy I'm bored with this - every week we get yet another Leave figure of hate. Grieve is just the latest. Let's just go with 'Full English Brexit': WTO, no arrangements with continental Europe, chlorinated chicken and all the rest of it. Yes, it will all be shit other than for those Leavers who can afford to emigrate, but let's give ourselves some peace.
At least Reainers are consistent in their figures of hate. Boris, Gove, Stuart, Hoey, Mogg....
I think the EU might be better disposed to us if a) we knew what we wanted and presented it to them, on the assumption that we are also aware of the rules of the EU as they stand; and b) if we didn't call people traitors who dissent from today's particular government line (whatever that happens to be day in day out).
I don't mean you, I mean our national media and senior politicians. As has been pointed out, the EU can use social and traditional media and when the most popular news website on the planet uses such terminology it is entirely understandable that they are suitably on guard.
They are pushing their advantage as we are trying to push ours.
If the government was trying to push it's advantage it would start the process of locking EU nations and companies out of London's capital markets. Force them to try and raise their money in Frankfurt and try and get investors to buy bonds under the threat of the ECJ's "for the greater good" attitude. It would also be beginning to withdraw from EU security cooperation and putting up the gates.
The EU are definitely pushing what advantages they have, and I don't blame them for that. The government are not doing so, and there are remainers in there preventing it. We should be readying the national economy for no deal Brexit, the work hasn't been done because the two remainers in 10/11 are still deluding themselves that the EU is interested in being in a partnership with the UK.
No that is not sensible negotiating. Negotiating is a process of stating clear objectives and then working towards an acceptable solution that both sides find beneficial or least harmful.
"locking EU nations and companies out of" this, that or the other is simply not a grown up mode of behaviour.
At least Theresa May understands this. As do you, under different circumstances (ie less full of beer).
What did you intend to happen when you posted this, Alistair? ...
No one posts on pb, a place where political views are probably as entrenched as anywhere, to persuade anyone round to their point of view. I'm not expecting the scales to fall from anyone's eyes. The hatred that pb's Leavers have for the EU is pathological. That's not going to be dispelled by sweet reason.
pb is a place where in effect people make predictions about the future - sometimes, but not always, for money. In my view, any predictions about the future of British politics that fail to take account of the fact that it will be divided for the foreseeable future will be absurdly optimistic. Any predictions that fail to take account of the fact that Britain is entirely lacking in any kind of post-Brexit vision will in my view be absurdly optimistic. Any predictions that fail to take into account the disfavour with which Britain will be regarded for the foreseeable future by other EU states will in my view be absurdly optimistic. The future for Britain looks likely to me to be one of cultural and economic decline, as Britain falls into being a grey and unhappy backwater.
Why is this? In large part it's because the referendum was won through xenophobic lies. So the point needs to be made.
I'm well aware that Leavers are highly resistant to this argument. But I'm not going to alter my argument to please others and this is integral to my argument.
The alternative is that Leavers acknowledge the damage that their manner of victory has done and start to consider how it might be put right. Like you, I regard that as most unlikely.
Half an hour in to PMQ's and still no questions about today's vote.
Theresa's won it hasn't she?
It certainly looks that way. In asking for the power to reverse the public vote, Grieve showed his true colours and his true agenda. He is a repulsive Brussels apologist who disgraces our party and our country.
I don’t like to get personal. But, really, Max: do grow up. Grieve is a distinguished thoughtful lawyer and Parliamentarian, who has been a loss to the Cabinet, and who is trying to do the best for his country as he sees it. He may be wrong. But he is not a repulsive apologist or traitor and he disgraces no-one. Your post, on the other hand.....
raitor”, “remoaner”, “xenophobe” abuse.
+1. I get very tired of personal abuse on both sides on this debate. It really doesn't help.
And me
t politics in one way or another. An extreme allergy to the x word is something that others are just going to have to get an epipen for.
You are just a bitter elitist who thinks his little cultural tribe is superior to others who live outside Zone 2 and is so blinded by his pretension he doesn't even realise Londoners are the unhappiest people in the country.
I'm comfortable being criticised by a man who thinks that a man's racial history is a valid reason for questioning his integrity. Since I now live in the countryside, you can't even nail one basic fact to hang your insult on.
n.......
I too am moving to the country. It's interesting how many people try to escape over congested cramped London once they can afford to, isn't it?
There's nowhere worse than central London on a humid Summer's day. The Tube is like a furnace.
Then don't use the Tube in rush hour – walk or cycle like me. Weird how people conflate an entire city with its rapid transport system at a certain time or in a particular weather pattern. It's rather like saying, "I don't like Manchester. The Metrolink is unpleasant at 11pm on Friday nights."
The humidity makes it pretty uncomfortable above ground, especially if one is wearing a suit and tie. The Tube is especially uncomfortable.
I think the EU might be better disposed to us if a) we knew what we wanted and presented it to them, on the assumption that we are also aware of the rules of the EU as they stand; and b) if we didn't call people traitors who dissent from today's particular government line (whatever that happens to be day in day out).
I don't mean you, I mean our national media and senior politicians. As has been pointed out, the EU can use social and traditional media and when the most popular news website on the planet uses such terminology it is entirely understandable that they are suitably on guard.
They are pushing their advantage as we are trying to push ours.
If the government was trying to push it's advantage it would start the process of locking EU nations and companies out of London's capital markets.
I'm not sure that's a very sensible idea. Ultimately, London is just one financial centre, and there are others - such as New York.
Also, the people that make up the capital markets in London are fundamentally mobile. There is massive factory, there are a bunch of people with phones and computers, who can get on planes and move elsewhere.
Why do the big Uuuuge buildings costing millions need to be built if it all can be done with a laptop and a phone ?
No work would get done if they were sat at home...
Yup and it does seem some of the "misguided" rebels are every bit as weird as the more extreme Brexiteers. To add to the apologist Grieve we have Soubry who sees herself as a kind of latter day reverse Joan of Arc, Sandbach who is up for suing people having the temerity to email her about Brexit, the policy somersaulting flakey Woollaston and Heidi Allen who might as well sit on the opposition benches as she seems to oppose the gov't on almost everything. Pragmatic centre of the party Tories groan at both sides.
"... flakey Woollaston and Heidi Allen who might as well sit on the opposition benches as she seems to oppose the gov't on almost everything. "
"Sarah Wollaston is a Conservative MP, and on the vast majority of issues votes the same way as other Conservative MPs." "Sarah Wollaston has occasionally rebelled against their party in the current parliament." https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/24761/sarah_wollaston/totnes
Don't let this one issue blind you. Both are loyal Conservatives; but they are also individuals and constituency MPs.
Opposing and rebelling are not quite the same thing especially bearing in mind the way the gov't and T May give way so easily to avoid defeats.
No, sorry, you are wrong: on the vast majority of issues those two you named are loyal Conservatives, balancing (as all MPs should do) what they feel is right for their conscience, their constituents, the party and the country.
You could argue they are mouthy gits, but then so are people like IDS (when not coughing), JRM and others. In fact, being mouthy is sometimes the best way of getting what you feel is best for their conscience, their constituents, their party and the country.
Look Heidi is attractive (if I'm allowed to say that) and bright but she opposed the UTC roll-out , the DUP confidence arrangement and pronounced TM would only survive 6 months in addition to her pro EU stance. I'm all for independently minded MPs but sometimes you have to rein that back for the greater good. It looks like the rebels have done just that today.
"I'm all for independently minded MPs "
Evidently you are not.
Time and a place. Today is not that time unless of course you are keen either to see Brexit fail (perhaps you do) or support Corbyn's attempt to fatally disable the gov't.
The country voted to leave the EU. But a majority of MPs are Remainers. Some of these MPs are actively working to prevent Brexit, even though a large majority of them voted for the referendum. However, they didn't like the decision. (A few have short-term memory problems. A peoples' vote? We had a referendum less than two years ago).
For some other Remainer MPs, there needs to be a fig leaf to cover their embarrassment, and to allow either the MPs to overrule the referendum result or as an excuse to run another referendum and keep doing it until they get another result. Without that fig leaf, they fear a thumping at the next GE. so they want to spread the blame. "It wasn't me, it was Parliament."
Then don't use the Tube in rush hour – walk or cycle like me. Weird how people conflate an entire city with its rapid transport system at a certain time or in a particular weather pattern. It's rather like saying, "I don't like Manchester. The Metrolink is unpleasant at 11pm on Friday nights."
Many moon ago, we had an engineer visit us from China. He had travelled extensively over the Far East, but had never been to Europe or the US. On his first weekend, a friend took him down to see the sights of London. Despite living in Hong Kong, he was raving about the brilliance of the Tube and the bus network, and thought it was better than anything he had seen in China, Japan or elsewhere in that region.
His comments were a bit of an eye-opener; I think familiarity can breed contempt.
(I'm not saying that those countries don't have better systems in part; just that the system as a whole in London works rather well).
Then don't use the Tube in rush hour – walk or cycle like me. Weird how people conflate an entire city with its rapid transport system at a certain time or in a particular weather pattern. It's rather like saying, "I don't like Manchester. The Metrolink is unpleasant at 11pm on Friday nights."
Cycle through traffic with London's pollution levels? That can't be good for your health. Then you have the terrible London drivers cutting you up or turning without looking.
Time and a place. Today is not that time unless of course you are keen either to see Brexit fail (perhaps you do) or as in the case of Corbyn the gov't disabled further.
Colour me unconvinced - and the same would also be true for the Maastricht rebels who tried to bring down Major's government, would it not? I wonder where some of them are now?
The single most important fact in British politics today is that the EU referendum was won with xenophobic lies. I'm not going to enter into some form of self-denying ordinance in pointing this out. It underpins most of current politics in one way or another. An extreme allergy to the x word is something that others are just going to have to get an epipen for.
I’ve never quite understood if you think that having any concerns at all about immigration are ipso facto xenophobic. Or any concerns about FoM? Or whether it was just the way the concerns about Turkey and non-EU migration were expressed ie the infamous posters?
Ie do you think that there was a legitimate way in which immigration concerns could have been expressed but that this was not, very regrettably in your view, the choice made by the Leave campaign?
For the record I do not think that having concerns about the level or type of immigration or indeed the effects of FoM is ipso fact xenophobic or racist. But it is possible that such concerns may be animated by prejudice and my be expressed in a way which is harmful to a society.
Did you think the Leave campaign was xenophobic in tone or not?
I wrote a thread header on immigration during the campaign which sets out my thoughts. I did not pay any attention to the Leave campaign on this issue. I rather like FoM. I was away for the last week so have no memory of seeing the Farage poster at the time. I have since written a thread header expressing my view on that and, more importantly, the language used about EU citizens here since the vote. To say I have concerns would be accurate.
I do understand why some people do worry about immigration and think one of the biggest policy mistakes all governments have made in recent decades is not to address this topic sensibly. This mistake is not limited to the British government, as a look across the Channel will show you. If it is not addressed properly, we end up with leaders justifying separating children from their mothers, as in the US, which is horrible.
You are equivocating. I'm asking you whether you thought the campaign was xenophobic. That you weren't aware of the content of the campaign bears no scrutiny whatsoever.
No I’m not. I’ve set out my thoughts in detail. If you don’t want to read them fair enough.
Then don't use the Tube in rush hour – walk or cycle like me. Weird how people conflate an entire city with its rapid transport system at a certain time or in a particular weather pattern. It's rather like saying, "I don't like Manchester. The Metrolink is unpleasant at 11pm on Friday nights."
Many moon ago, we had an engineer visit us from China. He had travelled extensively over the Far East, but had never been to Europe or the US. On his first weekend, a friend took him down to see the sights of London. Despite living in Hong Kong, he was raving about the brilliance of the Tube and the bus network, and thought it was better than anything he had seen in China, Japan or elsewhere in that region.
His comments were a bit of an eye-opener; I think familiarity can breed contempt.
(I'm not saying that those countries don't have better systems in part; just that the system as a whole in London works rather well).
London Transport is vastly better now, than when I was a child. The Tube is excellent, in terms of speed and reliability. Just horribly uncomfortable in weather like this.
A If May was sure of winning she would have pushed it to a vote. She wasn't sure so she bought Grieve off - again.
B The ERG is still driving the policy agenda. They want a no deal Brexit, and that is still very much on the table after today. May has foregone another opportunity to allow the HoC to articulate the views of the majority of MPs who favour a softer line.
C The absurdity of the debate about an amendment to a motion that might allow a possible future motion to be amended is symptomatic of how Brexit has made Westminster completely dysfunctional. The country faces the biggest crisis in the lifetime of anyone born after the Second World War and politicians can only debate it in terms of arcane procedural devices which do not do justice to the colossal issues at stake and are completely baffling to most people.
D The government is unable to lead, it remains riven and personal animosities are worse than ever. May is the weakest PM for many generations and she is viewed with distrust and contempt on all sides, her own colleagues included. It becomes harder by the day to see how it can reach an acceptable withdrawal deal.
What was the compromise this time around?
I believe it was an amendment to make it clear that a future unamendable motion may in fact be amendable under certain circumstances. Presumably if it is written in green ink and submitted by carrier pigeon in the dead of night. Or something.
I think the EU might be better disposed to us if a) we knew what we wanted and presented it to them, on the assumption that we are also aware of the rules of the EU as they stand; and b) if we didn't call people traitors who dissent from today's particular government line (whatever that happens to be day in day out).
I don't mean you, I mean our national media and senior politicians. As has been pointed out, the EU can use social and traditional media and when the most popular news website on the planet uses such terminology it is entirely understandable that they are suitably on guard.
They are pushing their advantage as we are trying to push ours.
If the government was trying to push it's advantage it would start the process of locking EU nations and companies out of London's capital markets. Force them to try and raise their money in Frankfurt and try and get investors to buy bonds under the threat of the ECJ's "for the greater good" attitude. It would also be beginning to withdraw from EU security cooperation and putting up the gates.
The EU are definitely pushing what advantages they have, and I don't blame them for that. The government are not doing so, and there are remainers in there preventing it. We should be readying the national economy for no deal Brexit, the work hasn't been done because the two remainers in 10/11 are still deluding themselves that the EU is interested in being in a partnership with the UK.
No that is not sensible negotiating. Negotiating is a process of stating clear objectives and then working towards an acceptable solution that both sides find beneficial or least harmful.
"locking EU nations and companies out of" this, that or the other is simply not a grown up mode of behaviour.
At least Theresa May understands this. As do you, under different circumstances (ie less full of beer).
Your premise relies on both parties acting in the same manner, the EU have consistently and clearly shown they are not interested in a partnership, they want the UK to be subservient. We must act accordingly.
Half an hour in to PMQ's and still no questions about today's vote.
Theresa's won it hasn't she?
.
+1. I get very tired of personal abuse on both sides on this debate. It really doesn't help.
And me
The single most important fact in British politics today is that the EU referendum was won with xenophobic lies. I'm not going to enter into some form of self-denying ordinance in pointing this out. It underpins most of current politics in one way or another. An extreme allergy to the x word is something that others are just going to have to get an epipen for.
Alastair - you do persist with this argument but just as many were misled by the remain scare stories.
Time we all moved on
The country cannot move on. It is committed to an anti-immigration prospectus, because of the way the referendum was won. There is no positive prospectus for Leave, because Leavers fell in behind a campaign of xenophobic lies.
Until this disaster is confronted, the process of clearing up the wreckage can't start.
Yet again with the same old nonsense. I voted remain because I believed the experts that we would have an immediate recession, and because I am reasonably well off and invested in society, I voted for the best for my family and prospects as I saw it. Initially I was going to vote leave, as despite considering my self European and having studied Modern Languages at university, I do not like the institution of the European Union, do not think it is transparent enough, and I think democracy is served better when more accountable.
I cannot understand how if I had changed my mind in 2016 I would have suddenly become a xenophobe or racist, or somehow my intelligence would have been impaired.
It is completely ridiculous to argue that over 17 million people voted with some kind of malicious agenda. Whilst in the polite circles that I socialise in it would be improper to discuss how you voted, I suspect that a number of kind generous people will have voted leave because that was the choice before them.
Finally negatives by association are simply ludicrous, I will avoid a Ken-ism, but Stalin loved films, Saddam Hussein wrote steamy romance novels, and Bin Laden loved Beach Volleyball. Should I really avoid all those for fear of guilt by association? Or should I not vote Labour because Nick Griffin likes Corbyn? Come up with another argument
A If May was sure of winning she would have pushed it to a vote. She wasn't sure so she bought Grieve off - again.
B The ERG is still driving the policy agenda. They want a no deal Brexit, and that is still very much on the table after today. May has foregone another opportunity to allow the HoC to articulate the views of the majority of MPs who favour a softer line.
C The absurdity of the debate about an amendment to a motion that might allow a possible future motion to be amended is symptomatic of how Brexit has made Westminster completely dysfunctional. The country faces the biggest crisis in the lifetime of anyone born after the Second World War and politicians can only debate it in terms of arcane procedural devices which do not do justice to the colossal issues at stake and are completely baffling to most people.
D The government is unable to lead, it remains riven and personal animosities are worse than ever. May is the weakest PM for many generations and she is viewed with distrust and contempt on all sides, her own colleagues included. It becomes harder by the day to see how it can reach an acceptable withdrawal deal.
What was the compromise this time around?
I believe it was an amendment to make it clear that a future unamendable motion may in fact be amendable under certain circumstances. Presumably if it is written in green ink and submitted by carrier pigeon in the dead of night. Or something.
Cycle through traffic with London's pollution levels? That can't be good for your health. Then you have the terrible London drivers cutting you up or turning without looking.
I think the EU might be better disposed to us if a) we knew what we wanted and presented it to them, on the assumption that we are also aware of the rules of the EU as they stand; and b) if we didn't call people traitors who dissent from today's particular government line (whatever that happens to be day in day out).
I don't mean you, I mean our national media and senior politicians. As has been pointed out, the EU can use social and traditional media and when the most popular news website on the planet uses such terminology it is entirely understandable that they are suitably on guard.
They are pushing their advantage as we are trying to push ours.
If the government was trying to push it's advantage it would start the process of locking EU nations and companies out of London's capital markets. Force them to try and raise their money in Frankfurt and try and get investors to buy bonds under the threat of the ECJ's "for the greater good" attitude. It would also be beginning to withdraw from EU security cooperation and putting up the gates.
The EU are definitely pushing what advantages they have, and I don't blame them for that. The government are not doing so, and there are remainers in there preventing it. We should be readying the national economy for no deal Brexit, the work hasn't been done because the two remainers in 10/11 are still deluding themselves that the EU is interested in being in a partnership with the UK.
No that is not sensible negotiating. Negotiating is a process of stating clear objectives and then working towards an acceptable solution that both sides find beneficial or least harmful.
"locking EU nations and companies out of" this, that or the other is simply not a grown up mode of behaviour.
At least Theresa May understands this. As do you, under different circumstances (ie less full of beer).
Your premise relies on both parties acting in the same manner, the EU have consistently and clearly shown they are not interested in a partnership, they want the UK to be subservient. We must act accordingly.
Brexit doesn’t elevate the UK to the status of the combined EU27.
The country voted to leave the EU. But a majority of MPs are Remainers. Some of these MPs are actively working to prevent Brexit, even though a large majority of them voted for the referendum. However, they didn't like the decision. (A few have short-term memory problems. A peoples' vote? We had a referendum less than two years ago).
For some other Remainer MPs, there needs to be a fig leaf to cover their embarrassment, and to allow either the MPs to overrule the referendum result or as an excuse to run another referendum and keep doing it until they get another result. Without that fig leaf, they fear a thumping at the next GE. so they want to spread the blame. "It wasn't me, it was Parliament."
Childish manoeuvres fool no one.
What solution to the Northern Ireland border did the country vote for?
The referendum vote was a vote *against* our membership - but there were and are 100 interpretations of what Leave might mean.
The idea that the will of the people was clear is a joke when you consider that 2 years on, the cabinet are unable to even agree their negotiating position on customs.
It's public record that a majority of MPs backed remain - but there's a clear majority for some form of Brexit now. The problem is that there seems to be no majority for any specific proposition with its compromises and flaws, and with nothing committed to before the refendum, no real claim of any specific mandate beyond the act of leaving.
Easy with hindsight, but why oh why didn't Cameron force the leavers to prepare a full white paper (the Scottish independence version was 600 pages I think) with a fully costed, implementable position laid out. Then have the referendum on that. Having to agree a customs and border position in advance would have exploded the Leave coalition, and done more than project fear ever achieved in explaining the drawbacks and difficulties.
P.S. I'm not persuaded the EU care about anything around meaningful votes. The substance of the deal is all that really matters, totally off the agenda in the Commons today.
I think the EU might be better disposed to us if a) we knew what we wanted and presented it to them, on the assumption that we are also aware of the rules of the EU as they stand; and b) if we didn't call people traitors who dissent from today's particular government line (whatever that happens to be day in day out).
I don't mean you, I mean our national media and senior politicians. As has been pointed out, the EU can use social and traditional media and when the most popular news website on the planet uses such terminology it is entirely understandable that they are suitably on guard.
They are pushing their advantage as we are trying to push ours.
If the government was trying to push it's advantage it would start the process of locking EU nations and companies out of London's capital markets. Force them to try and raise their money in Frankfurt and try and get investors to buy bonds under the threat of the ECJ's "for the greater good" attitude. It would also be beginning to withdraw from EU security cooperation and putting up the gates.
The EU are definitely pushing what advantages they have, and I don't blame them for that. The government are not doing so, and there are remainers in there preventing it. We should be readying the national economy for no deal Brexit, the work hasn't been done because the two remainers in 10/11 are still deluding themselves that the EU is interested in being in a partnership with the UK.
No that is not sensible negotiating. Negotiating is a process of stating clear objectives and then working towards an acceptable solution that both sides find beneficial or least harmful.
"locking EU nations and companies out of" this, that or the other is simply not a grown up mode of behaviour.
At least Theresa May understands this. As do you, under different circumstances (ie less full of beer).
Your premise relies on both parties acting in the same manner, the EU have consistently and clearly shown they are not interested in a partnership, they want the UK to be subservient. We must act accordingly.
Brexit doesn’t elevate the UK to the status of the combined EU27.
Face the facts: all the Leavers want is to see what a wrecked economy looks like. Let's just make Rees-Mogg PM and see how this plays out. I'm genuinely curious.
Face the facts: all the Leavers want is to see what a wrecked economy looks like. Let's just make Rees-Mogg PM and see how this plays out. I'm genuinely curious.
We are already wrecked from never joining the Euro. The City already moved to Frankfurt.
Face the facts: all the Leavers want is to see what a wrecked economy looks like. Let's just make Rees-Mogg PM and see how this plays out. I'm genuinely curious.
We are already wrecked from never joining the Euro. The City already moved to Frankfurt.
Cycle through traffic with London's pollution levels? That can't be good for your health. Then you have the terrible London drivers cutting you up or turning without looking.
If it's anything like the Shropshire Way to the south of Wem last week, then it is a literal jungle. I expected to meet Dr Livingstone at any moment whilst wading through shoulder-high pea plants...
(This year has been odd; the cold and wet spring seems to have made all the vegetation just go crazy over the last couple of months).
Face the facts: all the Leavers want is to see what a wrecked economy looks like. Let's just make Rees-Mogg PM and see how this plays out. I'm genuinely curious.
Damn, how did you find out that's what we were after?
"Easy with hindsight, but why oh why didn't Cameron force the leavers to prepare a full white paper (the Scottish independence version was 600 pages I think) with a fully costed, implementable position laid out."
Surely you know that Government works via the Civil Service? They instruct the mandarins and they ensure the government's wishes are followed. However, the mandarins don't take orders from any Tom, Dick, or Harry. The PM is the person they listen to, as do the cabinet ministers. No one on the Leave side had any power to order the civil service to do anything.
They would automatically prepare position papers on alternatives. There was only one alternative, so the possibilities would have been worked on UNLESS the PM stopped them, fearing it might add credence to a YES vote.
The why oh why is aimed at the wrong target. Groups of Brexiteers could have produced options - all of which would have been ignored and probably vilified by the media. "My God, they don't know what they're talking about, do they."
If the government wanting it. We should be readying the national economy for no deal Brexit, the work hasn't been done because the two remainers in 10/11 are still deluding themselves that the EU is interested in being in a partnership with the UK.
No that is not sensible negotiating. Negotiating is a process of stating clear objectives and then working towards an acceptable solution that both sides find beneficial or least harmful.
"locking EU nations and companies out of" this, that or the other is simply not a grown up mode of behaviour.
At least Theresa May understands this. As do you, under different circumstances (ie less full of beer).
Your premise relies on both parties acting in the same manner, the EU have consistently and clearly shown they are not interested in a partnership, they want the UK to be subservient. We must act accordingly.
The EU is a quasi-political union with rulebooks and treaties and whatnot from here until the outer bounds of the universe.
Now, this is not a reason not to vote to leave, indeed for many it was the sole reason for their vote.
But it does mean that before we stepped in to the negotiations we should have developed a coherent, decisive position of where we want to end up by the end of the process. We have not done this, mainly because the cabinet, just like the rest of the country (including the opposition) is fighting like cats in a sack over what exactly they want.
Had we handed the EU a coherent set of demands, while understanding the constraints that would be placed upon a possible third country (eg. Galileo which seems to have taken everyone by surprise), then the negotiations would have gone a lot better.
But we thought, for a laugh, presumably, that we would put David Davis in charge and then see how much he could bully and barge his way through because we are British dammit, and once upon a time half the world was coloured pink. Which has been not much, as it turns out.
+1. I get very tired of personal abuse on both sides on this debate. It really doesn't help.
I have a theory (might make a good thread header) based on the Indyref and Brexit, that referendums are particularly toxic.
Normally politics takes place at one remove. You can only vote for 1 MP, so the actions of others are somewhat out of your control.
In referendums, the traitors (whichever side you are on) are your family, co-workers, neighbours and friends. you can actually look them in the eye, and hate them for their vote.
The rancour in Scotland continues unabated. Brexit is 2 years younger, and probably has at least a generation to run (whatever the outcome)
I certainly agree Scott that referendums are generally more divisive than GEs and these 2 have been particularly so.
I think the EU might be better disposed to us if a) we knew what we wanted and presented it to them, on the assumption that we are also aware of the rules of the EU as they stand; and b) if we didn't call people traitors who dissent from today's particular government line (whatever that happens to be day in day out).
I don't mean you, I mean our national media and senior politicians. As has been pointed out, the EU can use social and traditional media and when the most popular news website on the planet uses such terminology it is entirely understandable that they are suitably on guard.
They are pushing their advantage as we are trying to push ours.
If the government was trying to push it's advantage it would start the process of locking EU nations and companies out of London's capital markets. Force them to try and raise their money in Frankfurt and try and get investors to buy bonds under the threat of the ECJ's "for the greater good" attitude. It would also be beginning to withdraw from EU security cooperation and putting up the gates.
The EU are definitely pushing what advantages they have, and I don't blame them for that. The government are not doing so, and there are remainers in there preventing it. We should be readying the national economy for no deal Brexit, the work hasn't been done because the two remainers in 10/11 are still deluding themselves that the EU is interested in being in a partnership with the UK.
No that is not sensible negotiating. Negotiating is a process of stating clear objectives and then working towards an acceptable solution that both sides find beneficial or least harmful.
"locking EU nations and companies out of" this, that or the other is simply not a grown up mode of behaviour.
At least Theresa May understands this. As do you, under different circumstances (ie less full of beer).
Your premise relies on both parties acting in the same manner, the EU have consistently and clearly shown they are not interested in a partnership, they want the UK to be subservient. We must act accordingly.
There are many criticisms to be made of the EU’s approach to the negotiations. But I don’t think they can be criticised for pointing out the consequences for Britain of the red lines which May set out.
It amuses me that we have a hung parliament and Labour - the main opposition party - have managed to have ZERO influence on the Brexit process.
LOL.
A very wise move. It is never a good idea to be caught on the scene of the crime. The Tories are not going to be able to avoid any of the responsibility for the Brexit balls-up.
It amuses me that we have a hung parliament and Labour - the main opposition party - have managed to have ZERO influence on the Brexit process.
LOL.
A very wise move. It is never a good idea to be caught on the scene of the crime. The Tories are not going to be able to avoid any of the responsibility for the Brexit balls-up.
Corbyn of course has already voted for Brexit and refused to oppose May on leaving the EEA
Face the facts: all the Leavers want is to see what a wrecked economy looks like. Let's just make Rees-Mogg PM and see how this plays out. I'm genuinely curious.
Damn, how did you find out that's what we were after?
Your honesty is refreshing! Yes, let's stop pussyfooting around: abolish elections and make Rees-Mogg divine leader for ever. Would any of the fabled 52% not actually want that to happen? (I'm a utilitarian all the way!)
+1. I get very tired of personal abuse on both sides on this debate. It really doesn't help.
And me
The single most important fact in British politics today is that the EU referendum was won with xenophobic lies. I'm not going to enter into some form of self-denying ordinance in pointing this out. It underpins most of current politics in one way or another. An extreme allergy to the x word is something that others are just going to have to get an epipen for.
You are just a bitter elitist who thinks his little cultural tribe is superior to others who live outside Zone 2 and is so blinded by his pretension he doesn't even realise Londoners are the unhappiest people in the country.
I'm comfortable being criticised by a man who thinks that a man's racial history is a valid reason for questioning his integrity. Since I now live in the countryside, you can't even nail one basic fact to hang your insult on.
I hope the move went well. I am planning a similar move in the course of the next year or so. When I think of all that is involved, I need a lie down.......
I too am moving to the country. It's interesting how many people try to escape over congested cramped London once they can afford to, isn't it?
Without wishing to boast I could probably have afforded to do so at any point during the last 30 years. But I like living in London and intend continuing to spend time here. As I am making the transition from full-time employment to freelance I have also decided to change the rhythm of my life so that I can spend time in a part of the world I love.
Indeed you clearly factored in Grieve and Morgan would vote with the Government.
TBF I am pleased as a Leaver the Government won.
State of the Tory rebels though.
I expected Grieve to vote for his amendment. Working back from last week's vote, I added the vote of the new MP to those supporting the amendment, assumed that 5 Labour MP's plus Kelvin Hopkins would vote with the government, and expected between seven and ten Conservative rebels. `
I hope the move went well. I am planning a similar move in the course of the next year or so. When I think of all that is involved, I need a lie down.......
The move has so far - touch wood - gone remarkably smoothly. I'm glad to be back in work for some peace and quiet though.
It amuses me that we have a hung parliament and Labour - the main opposition party - have managed to have ZERO influence on the Brexit process.
LOL.
A very wise move. It is never a good idea to be caught on the scene of the crime. The Tories are not going to be able to avoid any of the responsibility for the Brexit balls-up.
It amuses me that we have a hung parliament and Labour - the main opposition party - have managed to have ZERO influence on the Brexit process.
LOL.
A very wise move. It is never a good idea to be caught on the scene of the crime. The Tories are not going to be able to avoid any of the responsibility for the Brexit balls-up.
Still amusing. It felt like the Blair years would last forever. He, Mandelson, Campbell et al invested their whole political careers eulogising about the greatness of the EU (and stealthily handed over as much power to it as they could) but Corbyn, merely by sitting on his arse and not giving a monkey's, has pissed all of their doings up against the wall.
A bit like how Trump hates anything Obama-associated, it appears Corbyn loves the opportunity to kill any New Labour associations.
Most Cons MPs simply are not rebels and if you look at their voting record you will see them having voted for the government sort of come what may (May). And they are likely to continue to do so. Most Cons Remainers believe that Brexit should happen and don't intend to hijack it.
However, the union set of Cons Remain MPs and those on the centre right is large. And they have watched the extremerightification and retoxification of their party over the past few months and couple of years. And they don't like it at all.
The thing that will provoke such hitherto non-rebel centre right MPs into being rebellious centre right MPs is if any of the ERG headbangers gets to lead the party. That is the red line.
Grieve seems to have gone from Brexiteer public enemy #1 to remain enemy #1 on twitter in the last hour.
Which is precisely why the Tory rebels needed to be wary of supping with the devil. None of their erstwhile supporters in the Remain camp had the ongoing welfare of the Tory government in mind.
Then don't use the Tube in rush hour – walk or cycle like me. Weird how people conflate an entire city with its rapid transport system at a certain time or in a particular weather pattern. It's rather like saying, "I don't like Manchester. The Metrolink is unpleasant at 11pm on Friday nights."
Many moon ago, we had an engineer visit us from China. He had travelled extensively over the Far East, but had never been to Europe or the US. On his first weekend, a friend took him down to see the sights of London. Despite living in Hong Kong, he was raving about the brilliance of the Tube and the bus network, and thought it was better than anything he had seen in China, Japan or elsewhere in that region.
His comments were a bit of an eye-opener; I think familiarity can breed contempt.
(I'm not saying that those countries don't have better systems in part; just that the system as a whole in London works rather well).
London Transport is vastly better now, than when I was a child. The Tube is excellent, in terms of speed and reliability. Just horribly uncomfortable in weather like this.
Indeed. It is an excellent system. One of the best in the world. Streets ahead of the rest of the UKs rail and transport systems. This is very hard to understand since it is a nationalised industry and we are forever being told on here that nationalised industries are inherently inefficient and wasteful.
I hope the move went well. I am planning a similar move in the course of the next year or so. When I think of all that is involved, I need a lie down.......
The move has so far - touch wood - gone remarkably smoothly. I'm glad to be back in work for some peace and quiet though.
Am glad. I used to feel like that on a Monday morning after a weekend with the children. And then I remembered all the grown up toddlers in the office I had to deal with........
Yes, the government won every amendment, if the Lords try and send it back now I really do think we'll end up seeing 500 Brexit peers to ram it through.
The country voted to leave the EU. But a majority of MPs are Remainers. Some of these MPs are actively working to prevent Brexit, even though a large majority of them voted for the referendum. However, they didn't like the decision. (A few have short-term memory problems. A peoples' vote? We had a referendum less than two years ago).
For some other Remainer MPs, there needs to be a fig leaf to cover their embarrassment, and to allow either the MPs to overrule the referendum result or as an excuse to run another referendum and keep doing it until they get another result. Without that fig leaf, they fear a thumping at the next GE. so they want to spread the blame. "It wasn't me, it was Parliament."
Childish manoeuvres fool no one.
What solution to the Northern Ireland border did the country vote for?
The referendum vote was a vote *against* our membership - but there were and are 100 interpretations of what Leave might mean.
The idea that the will of the people was clear is a joke when you consider that 2 years on, the cabinet are unable to even agree their negotiating position on customs.
It's public record that a majority of MPs backed remain - but there's a clear majority for some form of Brexit now. The problem is that there seems to be no majority for any specific proposition with its compromises and flaws, and with nothing committed to before the refendum, no real claim of any specific mandate beyond the act of leaving.
Easy with hindsight, but why oh why didn't Cameron force the leavers to prepare a full white paper (the Scottish independence version was 600 pages I think) with a fully costed, implementable position laid out. Then have the referendum on that. Having to agree a customs and border position in advance would have exploded the Leave coalition, and done more than project fear ever achieved in explaining the drawbacks and difficulties.
P.S. I'm not persuaded the EU care about anything around meaningful votes. The substance of the deal is all that really matters, totally off the agenda in the Commons today.
There is only one reason that Cameron didn't make Leave come up with a white paper - it would legitimise them, and he framed arguments against in ways which legitimised his position only. I said at the time that funding / civil service support should have been given to the Leave campaign so we knew what we were voting for
Indeed. It is an excellent system. One of the best in the world. Streets ahead of the rest of the UKs rail and transport systems. This is very hard to understand since it is a nationalised industry and we are forever being told on here that nationalised industries are inherently inefficient and wasteful.
I think the whole tap in tap out contactless system used for TFL ought to be nationwide for every bus and train with standard fares for every journey.
Indeed you clearly factored in Grieve and Morgan would vote with the Government.
TBF I am pleased as a Leaver the Government won.
State of the Tory rebels though.
I expected Grieve to vote for his amendment. Working back from last week's vote, I added the vote of the new MP to those supporting the amendment, assumed that 5 Labour MP's plus Kelvin Hopkins would vote with the government, and expected between seven and ten Conservative rebels. `
Yes, the government won every amendment, if the Lords try and send it back now I really do think we'll end up seeing 500 Brexit peers to ram it through.
The Lords would be foolish to send it back now, even Ken Clarke might think about voting with the Gov't were that to happen.
It amuses me that we have a hung parliament and Labour - the main opposition party - have managed to have ZERO influence on the Brexit process.
LOL.
A very wise move. It is never a good idea to be caught on the scene of the crime. The Tories are not going to be able to avoid any of the responsibility for the Brexit balls-up.
It amuses me that we have a hung parliament and Labour - the main opposition party - have managed to have ZERO influence on the Brexit process.
LOL.
A very wise move. It is never a good idea to be caught on the scene of the crime. The Tories are not going to be able to avoid any of the responsibility for the Brexit balls-up.
Still amusing. It felt like the Blair years would last forever. He, Mandelson, Campbell et al invested their whole political careers eulogising about the greatness of the EU (and stealthily handed over as much power to it as they could) but Corbyn, merely by sitting on his arse and not giving a monkey's, has pissed all of their doings up against the wall.
A bit like how Trump hates anything Obama-associated, it appears Corbyn loves the opportunity to kill any New Labour associations.
The government made a huge mistake in not using Mandelson to help them. A former EU trade commissioner, his knowledge would have been invaluable in helping the government come up with some workable plans. Instead we have that preening twit, Fox.
6 Con rebels, 4 Lab rebels - so in theory Govt should have won by 9.
Yet they actually won by 16 - implies 7 more opposition abstentions than Govt abstentions - that's quite a lot - potentially implies disorganisation - unless there were a lot of genuine Lab abstentions like Flint.
"MPs backed Theresa May over what would happen in the event of there being no deal after key Tory rebels backed down.
It came after ministers agreed the Speaker would be able to decide if MPs had the power to amend a motion on what to do if there is no agreement the EU."
So the Gov't places power in the hands of the Speaker. Is that a good idea?
"MPs backed Theresa May over what would happen in the event of there being no deal after key Tory rebels backed down.
It came after ministers agreed the Speaker would be able to decide if MPs had the power to amend a motion on what to do if there is no agreement the EU."
So the Gov't places power in the hands of the Speaker. Is that a good idea?
Are you questioning the incredible impartial stance he has shown on his issue...it isn’t like he drives around with a bollocks to brexit sticker on his car...
Indeed. It is an excellent system. One of the best in the world. Streets ahead of the rest of the UKs rail and transport systems. This is very hard to understand since it is a nationalised industry and we are forever being told on here that nationalised industries are inherently inefficient and wasteful.
I think the whole tap in tap out contactless system used for TFL ought to be nationwide for every bus and train with standard fares for every journey.
AIUI it cannot be done, and it's getting increasingly hard to do as TfL's network expands. The problem is possible routes: for example, if you want to go from South Woodford to Mile End on the tube, there is only one practical route whilst tapping in and out of the tube between those zones. But there is one possible combination where they cannot tell which route you took between the zones as you don't have to tap out/in, and therefore charge the lowest of the alternative fares.
The larger the network, the more complex it gets to work out which route a passenger took, and therefore how much they should be charged for the journey.
It's worse on local busses, where there is no tap-out and therefore no way to know how long a passenger stays on.
Today was the day Brexit really will mean Brexit and with Labour Leavers key, the Commons has now voted to Leave the Single Market (with Corbyn abstaining) and to leave the Customs Union and to not let the Commons take over in the event of No Deal ensuring Brexit continues on its course (and Labour Leave rebels voting with the government were key in the latter votes)
It amuses me that we have a hung parliament and Labour - the main opposition party - have managed to have ZERO influence on the Brexit process.
LOL.
A very wise move. It is never a good idea to be caught on the scene of the crime. The Tories are not going to be able to avoid any of the responsibility for the Brexit balls-up.
It amuses me that we have a hung parliament and Labour - the main opposition party - have managed to have ZERO influence on the Brexit process.
LOL.
A very wise move. It is never a good idea to be caught on the scene of the crime. The Tories are not going to be able to avoid any of the responsibility for the Brexit balls-up.
Still amusing. It felt like the Blair years would last forever. He, Mandelson, Campbell et al invested their whole political careers eulogising about the greatness of the EU (and stealthily handed over as much power to it as they could) but Corbyn, merely by sitting on his arse and not giving a monkey's, has pissed all of their doings up against the wall.
A bit like how Trump hates anything Obama-associated, it appears Corbyn loves the opportunity to kill any New Labour associations.
The government made a huge mistake in not using Mandelson to help them. A former EU trade commissioner, his knowledge would have been invaluable in helping the government come up with some workable plans. Instead we have that preening twit, Fox.
I don't disagree with that. The most hated politicians are often the most effective ones -
Jezza has played a blinder. The nation will now view Theresa and the Tories as wholly responsible for the Brexit we actually get, which will presumably be Rees-Mogg's preferred option. The political dividends to be reaped may be massive.
Comments
"locking EU nations and companies out of" this, that or the other is simply not a grown up mode of behaviour.
At least Theresa May understands this. As do you, under different circumstances (ie less full of beer).
pb is a place where in effect people make predictions about the future - sometimes, but not always, for money. In my view, any predictions about the future of British politics that fail to take account of the fact that it will be divided for the foreseeable future will be absurdly optimistic. Any predictions that fail to take account of the fact that Britain is entirely lacking in any kind of post-Brexit vision will in my view be absurdly optimistic. Any predictions that fail to take into account the disfavour with which Britain will be regarded for the foreseeable future by other EU states will in my view be absurdly optimistic. The future for Britain looks likely to me to be one of cultural and economic decline, as Britain falls into being a grey and unhappy backwater.
Why is this? In large part it's because the referendum was won through xenophobic lies. So the point needs to be made.
I'm well aware that Leavers are highly resistant to this argument. But I'm not going to alter my argument to please others and this is integral to my argument.
The alternative is that Leavers acknowledge the damage that their manner of victory has done and start to consider how it might be put right. Like you, I regard that as most unlikely.
The country voted to leave the EU. But a majority of MPs are Remainers. Some of these MPs are actively working to prevent Brexit, even though a large majority of them voted for the referendum. However, they didn't like the decision. (A few have short-term memory problems. A peoples' vote? We had a referendum less than two years ago).
For some other Remainer MPs, there needs to be a fig leaf to cover their embarrassment, and to allow either the MPs to overrule the referendum result or as an excuse to run another referendum and keep doing it until they get another result. Without that fig leaf, they fear a thumping at the next GE. so they want to spread the blame. "It wasn't me, it was Parliament."
Childish manoeuvres fool no one.
His comments were a bit of an eye-opener; I think familiarity can breed contempt.
(I'm not saying that those countries don't have better systems in part; just that the system as a whole in London works rather well).
http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-71558783.html
Besides, that's not what you originally said.
Noes 319
Govt majority 16 and another key win for May
I cannot understand how if I had changed my mind in 2016 I would have suddenly become a xenophobe or racist, or somehow my intelligence would have been impaired.
It is completely ridiculous to argue that over 17 million people voted with some kind of malicious agenda. Whilst in the polite circles that I socialise in it would be improper to discuss how you voted, I suspect that a number of kind generous people will have voted leave because that was the choice before them.
Finally negatives by association are simply ludicrous, I will avoid a Ken-ism, but Stalin loved films, Saddam Hussein wrote steamy romance novels, and Bin Laden loved Beach Volleyball. Should I really avoid all those for fear of guilt by association? Or should I not vote Labour because Nick Griffin likes Corbyn? Come up with another argument
But be careful - it's a jungle out there.
The referendum vote was a vote *against* our membership - but there were and are 100 interpretations of what Leave might mean.
The idea that the will of the people was clear is a joke when you consider that 2 years on, the cabinet are unable to even agree their negotiating position on customs.
It's public record that a majority of MPs backed remain - but there's a clear majority for some form of Brexit now. The problem is that there seems to be no majority for any specific proposition with its compromises and flaws, and with nothing committed to before the refendum, no real claim of any specific mandate beyond the act of leaving.
Easy with hindsight, but why oh why didn't Cameron force the leavers to prepare a full white paper (the Scottish independence version was 600 pages I think) with a fully costed, implementable position laid out. Then have the referendum on that. Having to agree a customs and border position in advance would have exploded the Leave coalition, and done more than project fear ever achieved in explaining the drawbacks and difficulties.
P.S. I'm not persuaded the EU care about anything around meaningful votes. The substance of the deal is all that really matters, totally off the agenda in the Commons today.
(This year has been odd; the cold and wet spring seems to have made all the vegetation just go crazy over the last couple of months).
LOL.
TBF I am pleased as a Leaver the Government won.
State of the Tory rebels though.
Heidi Allen
Ken Clarke
Philip Lee
Antoinette Sandbach
Anna Soubry
Sarah Wollaston
"Easy with hindsight, but why oh why didn't Cameron force the leavers to prepare a full white paper (the Scottish independence version was 600 pages I think) with a fully costed, implementable position laid out."
Surely you know that Government works via the Civil Service? They instruct the mandarins and they ensure the government's wishes are followed. However, the mandarins don't take orders from any Tom, Dick, or Harry. The PM is the person they listen to, as do the cabinet ministers. No one on the Leave side had any power to order the civil service to do anything.
They would automatically prepare position papers on alternatives. There was only one alternative, so the possibilities would have been worked on UNLESS the PM stopped them, fearing it might add credence to a YES vote.
The why oh why is aimed at the wrong target. Groups of Brexiteers could have produced options - all of which would have been ignored and probably vilified by the media. "My God, they don't know what they're talking about, do they."
Now, this is not a reason not to vote to leave, indeed for many it was the sole reason for their vote.
But it does mean that before we stepped in to the negotiations we should have developed a coherent, decisive position of where we want to end up by the end of the process. We have not done this, mainly because the cabinet, just like the rest of the country (including the opposition) is fighting like cats in a sack over what exactly they want.
Had we handed the EU a coherent set of demands, while understanding the constraints that would be placed upon a possible third country (eg. Galileo which seems to have taken everyone by surprise), then the negotiations would have gone a lot better.
But we thought, for a laugh, presumably, that we would put David Davis in charge and then see how much he could bully and barge his way through because we are British dammit, and once upon a time half the world was coloured pink. Which has been not much, as it turns out.
But I still enjoy your posts :-)
https://twitter.com/ParlyApp/status/1009454792253599744
https://mobile.twitter.com/EuropeElects/status/1009428304879915009
A bit like how Trump hates anything Obama-associated, it appears Corbyn loves the opportunity to kill any New Labour associations.
Most Cons MPs simply are not rebels and if you look at their voting record you will see them having voted for the government sort of come what may (May). And they are likely to continue to do so. Most Cons Remainers believe that Brexit should happen and don't intend to hijack it.
However, the union set of Cons Remain MPs and those on the centre right is large. And they have watched the extremerightification and retoxification of their party over the past few months and couple of years. And they don't like it at all.
The thing that will provoke such hitherto non-rebel centre right MPs into being rebellious centre right MPs is if any of the ERG headbangers gets to lead the party. That is the red line.
They can't even agree now!
Davis is one of the main leavers. One of the main leave campaigners. We are leaving.
Though of course May is still aiming for a transition period until December 2020 then a Canada style FTA with the EU
Miss Cyclefree, Mandelson is an order of magnitude smarter than Fox. That said, I'd want someone to keep an eye on him.
6 Con rebels, 4 Lab rebels - so in theory Govt should have won by 9.
Yet they actually won by 16 - implies 7 more opposition abstentions than Govt abstentions - that's quite a lot - potentially implies disorganisation - unless there were a lot of genuine Lab abstentions like Flint.
"MPs backed Theresa May over what would happen in the event of there being no deal after key Tory rebels backed down.
It came after ministers agreed the Speaker would be able to decide if MPs had the power to amend a motion on what to do if there is no agreement the EU."
So the Gov't places power in the hands of the Speaker. Is that a good idea?
That's pretty basic for someone who purports to be a political commentator.
The larger the network, the more complex it gets to work out which route a passenger took, and therefore how much they should be charged for the journey.
It's worse on local busses, where there is no tap-out and therefore no way to know how long a passenger stays on.
(All AIUI)
Flint and Hopkins are definitely on principle.
I'm hearing Swinson voted even though she's past her due date !!
Mandelson
Balls
Osborne
Gove