Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » NEW EMERGENCY PB / POLLING MATTERS PODCAST: Bye Bye Boris and

135

Comments

  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    Gauke: if people don't like this plan, come forward with a better one.

  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453


    From Max Hastings brutal Times column

    Baldrick in a blonde wig...
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 5,704
    Dr P.

    Jezza does have consistency; he consistently dislikes his own country. That is both negative and boring. Old-fashioned socialists (Atlee, Foot etc) tended to be reasonably patriotic.

    Perhaps that is old-fashioned now, but it's still a potent vote-winner.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 38,696
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Quite surprised that Liam Fox has not resigned as well. It has always been difficult to see what his job actually was but it is even less clear given the terms of the Chequers proposal. He has been remarkably quiet. Not a bad thing in itself of course.

    Perhaps he is being canny. If/when Brussels throws Chequers back, his position may look very different.
    Not really. He will still be a prat.
    With knobs on.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 52,926
    Mr. P, unfair.

    Baldrick in the first series was clever. In the fourth, his plan to get out of going over the top by pretending to be cooks worked.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 29,157

    Gauke: if people don't like this plan, come forward with a better one.

    Answer came there none.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 30,523
    Jonathan said:

    The importance of the City to the UK economy played a part in that. Unless you think Labour should have rebalanced the economy away from that, I doubt any govt would have stood up to that hurricane. The oft quoted regulations would have done less than people say. Bankers would have found ways round them to make gazillions.

    No the issue is that despite having one of the longest growth periods ever recorded so a recession was due, we went into the recession with a maxed out deficit. Had he followed his own original golden rule and gone into the recession running a surplus then the budget could have coped rather than swelling to an unmanageable £175bn deficit in a year.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 20,894
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    IanB2 said:

    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    surby said:

    TGOHF said:

    Boris is no loss. But the top 4 ministers are now Remainers led by a nonentity who has shat in the soup.

    Why bother voting to re-elect them ?

    I think Mrs May is assuming that you’ll vote blue to stop Corbyn becoming PM.
    .... as she did in 2017 when she was saved by the collapse of UKIP. Hang on though.....

    "snip”

    https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/986265/Brexit-News-Nigel-Farage-Ukip-leader-May-Davis-Johnson
    There is real danger to look at their members and activists and realise that they cannot control this. People will have an emotional response to this situation that will wash them away if they get it wrong.
    I've never voted UKIP and loathe much of what they're about. But I am now so peed off with May's turd of a proposal and her cack-handed way of shovelling it through the cabinet at Chequers (I've worked with a f-ing useless leader like that and it makes me want to vomit) that I would actually right now consider voting for them.

    May has to go
    You should follow your feelings. Do it!
    So he should. The more chaotic the better should be th Westminster Bridge
    New career Roger ?

    If youre heading a lynch mob perhaps we could all send you some more names
    Just a figure of speech. But there is so Cameron.
    Despite his lac escape.
    why would he get credit for having to repair his own cock up ?
    Because, despitresponded well to the crisis.

    I wonder how May would have got on.
    Labour were not the cause of the global financial crisis, they were the cause of the UK being exposed to it worse than most countries.
    The importance of the City to the UK economy played a part in that. Unless you think Labour should have rebalanced the economy away from that, I doubt any govt would have stood up to that hurricane. The oft quoted regulations would have done less than people say. Bankers would have found ways round them to make gazillions.
    Of course I think HMG should have maintained a balanced economy. That's one of the ways of managing risk. Betting the farm on financial services was a high risk strategy which didn't pay off. And for the avoidance of doubt Cameron and Osborne would have been no better.
  • glwglw Posts: 6,044
    I hope Theresa May doesn't listen to Radio 5 in the morning, because if she does it will have spoilt her breakfast.

    Sophie in 't Veld (Guy Verhofstadt's deputy) was quite clear that the idea that the UK could pick and choose the four pillars/freedoms was not going to fly. She could not have been clearer, the EU is not going to break up the internal market.

    So what happens if the EU says no? Surely May will be toast.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 10,265
    In brief:

    1. Theresa May needs to get the backstop agreed where there is a potential trade border on the Irish Sea. This unlocks the Article 50 Withdrawal Agreement and a somewhat orderly Brexit.

    2. The only way she can do this is by implying a UK wide deal that makes the NI backstop moot. This looks awfully like vassal state. So she comes up with a fiction of a cakist halfway house furture arrangement (the Chequers statement)

    3. The EU needs to be seen to be considering this proposition just long enough to get the Withdrawal Agreement signed.

    4. The actual agreement won't look anything like Chequers but that happens after we leave the EU and during the "transition". We will probably go for the vassal state rather than Fuck Business + NI backstop.

    5. Very high chance of this going wrong. In this case there will be a full blown crisis in the summer and autumn. Things get uncertain at this point but I don't see a No Deal position lasting more than a few days. At which point probable surrender. There won't be a figleaf of negotiation with the EU.

    6. If you are a scorched earth Leaver, I don't see any reason why you wouldn't force the crisis. We are going to end up in the vassal state anyway. Might as well make a last stand.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 28,507

    Sean_F said:

    Barnesian said:

    I'm losing track of the possible scenarios!

    There are two separate deals to be done.

    The first is the A50 withdrawal deal by 29 March 2018. This includes legal detail on financial costs, EU citizens and NI backstop. Now that Mrs May has apparently conceded the EU version of the NI backstop I think the only barriers to this deal going through are a) a "meaningful" vote in the UK parliament and b) agreement on the outline of the future relationship. The latter will not be full of fine legal detail but will be short and consist of ambiguous fudge that the UK and EU can agree such as a "customs arrangement" and "common rules on standards".

    With that in mind I think the EU could agree a version of the Chequers proposal that strips out the detail on eg maxfac and leaves a paragraph of fudge that May can agree to in order to complete the A50 agreement.

    The second deal (the trade deal) will be negotiated during the transition period and I suspect will be full capitulation to Norway plus CU.

    I also think there will be no VONC, no early GE, and that May will survive until at least end 2021.

    Phew. Writing that out has clarified my mind but it could all change this afternoon!

    I think this is spot on up to the point where May comes back from the October summit with a piece of paper hailing "Brexit in our time".

    By that point it will be an unbeloved deal that doesn't command a majority in parliament, but that is nevertheless accepted as a triumph of diplomacy as the best possible form of Brexit to meet the mandate of the 2016 referendum.

    May will simply pull off another coup de theatre and announce a second referendum to offer people the opportunity to flush away the "turd" way and remain. A landslide will be on the cards and the full extent of May's political genius will be plain for all to see.
    A cunning plan, worthy of Baldrick himself.

    Faced with a choice between Remain, or a deal so bad that no sane person could choose it, I expect most Leave supporters would stay at home, and exact revenge on the Conservatives in future elections.
    This is where I should highlight another part of the cunning plan.

    May has now irrevocably tied the key intellectual leader of the 2016 campaign behind her deal. In the second referendum campaign, Gove will be the face of the "turd" way and will have to defend it to the death, explaining to all comers why it does not betray the 2016 result and why it is the best possible version of Brexit.

    She's a genius I tell you. ;)
    In reality, I think she's far too straightforward to devise such a plan.
  • PendduPenddu Posts: 265
    Serious question for you Royalists and Football fans out there....what happens if England beat Croatia.....then queen dies?

    Will world cup final be played?

    In the interests of full disclosure I think Croatia will win...and Queen is already dead...... but hypothetically what happens?

  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 13,599
    Elliot said:

    The comparison to 2016 US election has occurred to me that some of the newish posters might not be genuine.

    A shocking suggestion comrade.

    I can say a firm niet to that idea.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 28,507
    glw said:

    I hope Theresa May doesn't listen to Radio 5 in the morning, because if she does it will have spoilt her breakfast.

    Sophie in 't Veld (Guy Verhofstadt's deputy) was quite clear that the idea that the UK could pick and choose the four pillars/freedoms was not going to fly. She could not have been clearer, the EU is not going to break up the internal market.

    So what happens if the EU says no? Surely May will be toast.

    If so, that's that.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 30,972
    glw said:

    I hope Theresa May doesn't listen to Radio 5 in the morning, because if she does it will have spoilt her breakfast.

    Sophie in 't Veld (Guy Verhofstadt's deputy) was quite clear that the idea that the UK could pick and choose the four pillars/freedoms was not going to fly. She could not have been clearer, the EU is not going to break up the internal market.

    So what happens if the EU says no? Surely May will be toast.

    How many times does the EU have to tell us this? If they give in on FoM, then Italy and God knows who all else will be banging on their door within minutes.

    Perhaps that's how this gets resolved, a majority of the EU 27 decide they don't want FoM either and the whole edifice comes crashing down.
  • currystarcurrystar Posts: 1,171
    glw said:

    I hope Theresa May doesn't listen to Radio 5 in the morning, because if she does it will have spoilt her breakfast.

    Sophie in 't Veld (Guy Verhofstadt's deputy) was quite clear that the idea that the UK could pick and choose the four pillars/freedoms was not going to fly. She could not have been clearer, the EU is not going to break up the internal market.

    So what happens if the EU says no? Surely May will be toast.

    Why? It will be a No Deal situation caused by the EU's refusal to negotiate.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    Penddu said:

    Serious question for you Royalists and Football fans out there....what happens if England beat Croatia.....then queen dies?

    Will world cup final be played?

    In the interests of full disclosure I think Croatia will win...and Queen is already dead...... but hypothetically what happens?

    The team will have to learn the new words to the national anthem and wear black armbands.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 30,972

    Gauke: if people don't like this plan, come forward with a better one.

    Answer came there none.
    The Brexiteers have been found out. At least by any voters still bothering to keep up.

    There is nothing in their briefcase.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 32,036
    edited July 2018
    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    Barnesian said:

    I'm losing track of the possible scenarios!

    There are two separate deals to be done.

    The first is the A50 withdrawal deal by 29 March 2018. This includes legal detail on financial costs, EU citizens and NI backstop. Now that Mrs May has apparently conceded the EU version of the NI backstop I think the only barriers to this deal going through are a) a "meaningful" vote in the UK parliament and b) agreement on the outline of the future relationship. The latter will not be full of fine legal detail but will be short and consist of ambiguous fudge that the UK and EU can agree such as a "customs arrangement" and "common rules on standards".

    With that in mind I think the EU could agree a version of the Chequers proposal that strips out the detail on eg maxfac and leaves a paragraph of fudge that May can agree to in order to complete the A50 agreement.

    The second deal (the trade deal) will be negotiated during the transition period and I suspect will be full capitulation to Norway plus CU.

    I also think there will be no VONC, no early GE, and that May will survive until at least end 2021.

    Phew. Writing that out has clarified my mind but it could all change this afternoon!

    I think this is spot on up to the point where May comes back from the October summit with a piece of paper hailing "Brexit in our time".

    By that point it will be an unbeloved deal that doesn't command a majority in parliament, but that is nevertheless accepted as a triumph of diplomacy as the best possible form of Brexit to meet the mandate of the 2016 referendum.

    May will simply pull off another coup de theatre and announce a second referendum to offer people the opportunity to flush away the "turd" way and remain. A landslide will be on the cards and the full extent of May's political genius will be plain for all to see.
    A cunning plan, worthy of Baldrick himself.

    Faced with a choice between Remain, or a deal so bad that no sane person could choose it, I expect most Leave supporters would stay at home, and exact revenge on the Conservatives in future elections.
    This is where I should highlight another part of the cunning plan.

    May has now irrevocably tied the key intellectual leader of the 2016 campaign behind her deal. In the second referendum campaign, Gove will be the face of the "turd" way and will have to defend it to the death, explaining to all comers why it does not betray the 2016 result and why it is the best possible version of Brexit.

    She's a genius I tell you. ;)
    In reality, I think she's far too straightforward to devise such a plan.
    We'll see, but I think the evidence points to her having hidden depths when it comes to political tactics.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 19,558
    DavidL said:

    Quite surprised that Liam Fox has not resigned as well. It has always been difficult to see what his job actually was but it is even less clear given the terms of the Chequers proposal. He has been remarkably quiet. Not a bad thing in itself of course.

    Quite simple, I think - just grateful to May for giving him a cabinet post, and fairly certain if he leaves he won't be returning.

    One of the reasons for the long term survival of the Conservative party is that they have always tended to esteem loyalty to party above devotion to dogma, which leads to a certain pragmatism when hanging on to cabinet posts...

    And it's not as though he's the only Leaver staying in post.
  • asjohnstoneasjohnstone Posts: 1,276
    currystar said:

    glw said:

    I hope Theresa May doesn't listen to Radio 5 in the morning, because if she does it will have spoilt her breakfast.

    Sophie in 't Veld (Guy Verhofstadt's deputy) was quite clear that the idea that the UK could pick and choose the four pillars/freedoms was not going to fly. She could not have been clearer, the EU is not going to break up the internal market.

    So what happens if the EU says no? Surely May will be toast.

    Why? It will be a No Deal situation caused by the EU's refusal to negotiate.
    More likely she'd roll over and sign up for single market, vassal state with huge payments
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 5,840

    Jonathan said:

    The importance of the City to the UK economy played a part in that. Unless you think Labour should have rebalanced the economy away from that, I doubt any govt would have stood up to that hurricane. The oft quoted regulations would have done less than people say. Bankers would have found ways round them to make gazillions.

    No the issue is that despite having one of the longest growth periods ever recorded so a recession was due, we went into the recession with a maxed out deficit. Had he followed his own original golden rule and gone into the recession running a surplus then the budget could have coped rather than swelling to an unmanageable £175bn deficit in a year.
    The UK current budget deficit was very small, just 0.6% of GDP, on the eve of the financial crisis. If it had been a surplus of 0.6% of GDP, rather than borrowing 175bn a year, we would have been borrowing say 150bn a year. It would have made sod all difference.
  • currystarcurrystar Posts: 1,171

    currystar said:

    glw said:

    I hope Theresa May doesn't listen to Radio 5 in the morning, because if she does it will have spoilt her breakfast.

    Sophie in 't Veld (Guy Verhofstadt's deputy) was quite clear that the idea that the UK could pick and choose the four pillars/freedoms was not going to fly. She could not have been clearer, the EU is not going to break up the internal market.

    So what happens if the EU says no? Surely May will be toast.

    Why? It will be a No Deal situation caused by the EU's refusal to negotiate.
    More likely she'd roll over and sign up for single market, vassal state with huge payments
    There is absolutely no chance of that, I rate no deal a 40% chance now.
  • glwglw Posts: 6,044
    edited July 2018
    rkrkrk said:

    The UK current budget deficit was very small, just 0.6% of GDP, on the eve of the financial crisis. If it had been a surplus of 0.6% of GDP, rather than borrowing 175bn a year, we would have been borrowing say 150bn a year. It would have made sod all difference.

    That point is a little misleading, as the trajectory the economy was set on by Brown was way off what the actual revenue could support in the following years. Which lead to us borrowing one pound in every four at the worst point.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 16,300
    rkrkrk said:

    Jonathan said:

    The importance of the City to the UK economy played a part in that. Unless you think Labour should have rebalanced the economy away from that, I doubt any govt would have stood up to that hurricane. The oft quoted regulations would have done less than people say. Bankers would have found ways round them to make gazillions.

    No the issue is that despite having one of the longest growth periods ever recorded so a recession was due, we went into the recession with a maxed out deficit. Had he followed his own original golden rule and gone into the recession running a surplus then the budget could have coped rather than swelling to an unmanageable £175bn deficit in a year.
    The UK current budget deficit was very small, just 0.6% of GDP, on the eve of the financial crisis. If it had been a surplus of 0.6% of GDP, rather than borrowing 175bn a year, we would have been borrowing say 150bn a year. It would have made sod all difference.
    Household borrowing was running at over £100bn annually before the recession.

    Whether its government borrowing or household borrowing it was the country living beyond its means.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 29,157
    Can I blow my own trumpet a little? Every now and then I write something that turns out to have something in it. I wrote this one last year and it makes a point that right now you see being made quite a lot by others:

    http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2017/07/01/everything-is-negotiable-how-the-election-result-may-have-improved-britains-negotiating-position-in-the-brexit-talks/
  • glwglw Posts: 6,044

    How many times does the EU have to tell us this? If they give in on FoM, then Italy and God knows who all else will be banging on their door within minutes.

    Perhaps that's how this gets resolved, a majority of the EU 27 decide they don't want FoM either and the whole edifice comes crashing down.

    I genuinely do not understand how the goverment thinks the EU will accept what we are proposing, as you say they've said we can't do it many times before. Either we aren't listening, or the plan is that it will be rejected forcing us to choose between hard Brexit and remaining in the single market and the rest.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 10,265
    currystar said:

    currystar said:

    glw said:

    I hope Theresa May doesn't listen to Radio 5 in the morning, because if she does it will have spoilt her breakfast.

    Sophie in 't Veld (Guy Verhofstadt's deputy) was quite clear that the idea that the UK could pick and choose the four pillars/freedoms was not going to fly. She could not have been clearer, the EU is not going to break up the internal market.

    So what happens if the EU says no? Surely May will be toast.

    Why? It will be a No Deal situation caused by the EU's refusal to negotiate.
    More likely she'd roll over and sign up for single market, vassal state with huge payments
    There is absolutely no chance of that, I rate no deal a 40% chance now.
    We say No Deal. The EU will say, come back when you are ready to talk. When we come back it won't be because the EU has capitulated. The EU will aim to manage the standoff with the least detriment to itself while pressuring us to the table. This is the point where business will have to execute their ultimate contingency plan. It won't be pretty.

    As I said below scorched earth Leavers will want a No Deal last stand because they know they won't get a Brexit anything like the one they campaigned for. It is almost certainly why the cabinet rallied around May's Chequers plan. They know No Deal is a catastrophe.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 10,349
    10 years on after another DD resignation.

  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 14,198
    Yes, that's astonishing. I still think that the Leave vote lanced the boil for many people - they felt Something Is Being Done about migration, and they then started feeling more rational about it - what about the nurses and doctors, who's going to pick the fruit, etc. Also, the culture wars haven't been fed lately by new horrors like the Rotherham scandals - a period of people quietly getting on with life without doing anything awful has healed some of the fears.
  • surbysurby Posts: 1,227
    edited July 2018

    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    Barnesian said:

    I'm losing track of the possible scenarios!

    There are two separate deals to be done.





    Phew. Writing that out has clarified my mind but it could all change this afternoon!


    Faced with a choice between Remain, or a deal so bad that no sane person could choose it, I expect most Leave supporters would stay at home, and exact revenge on the Conservatives in future elections.
    This is where I should highlight another part of the cunning plan.

    May has now irrevocably tied the key intellectual leader of the 2016 campaign behind her deal. In the second referendum campaign, Gove will be the face of the "turd" way and will have to defend it to the death, explaining to all comers why it does not betray the 2016 result and why it is the best possible version of Brexit.

    She's a genius I tell you. ;)
    In reality, I think she's far too straightforward to devise such a plan.
    We'll see, but I think the evidence points to her having hidden depths when it comes to political tactics.
    Never underestimate anyone who reaches the top of the greasy pole. Some think she is a Remainer, some think she is a Brexiter. Answer: she is neither. In fact, she is nothing.

    Whatever suits her at the moment she is in. She is now aware of the catastrophe befalling Britain with a No Deal. Therefore, at the barest minimum she needs a WTO which needs EU cooperation. However, that would be a catastrophe too. So to keep Business as content as it is possible she is constructing a deal which she hope a lot of that she can get away with. She can't.

    The problem is that like many in Britain, we want a trade deal. To us we do not want the EU but the EEC [ in fact, not even that since we do not like the CAP, the CFP etc. ] Most here do not think that the other side has a say in the matter. Somehow we are so important that they have no choice but to agree to what we want. Obviously, that position has shifted somewhat but not by much among those whose day to day lives are not too affected by trade and commerce.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 30,972
    Bleak thread on NATO. And seems highly probable.

  • FF43FF43 Posts: 10,265
    FF43 said:

    We say No Deal. The EU will say, come back when you are ready to talk. When we come back it won't be because the EU has capitulated. The EU will aim to manage the standoff with the least detriment to itself while pressuring us to the table. This is the point where business will have to execute their ultimate contingency plan. It won't be pretty.

    As I said below scorched earth Leavers will want a No Deal last stand because they know they won't get a Brexit anything like the one they campaigned for. It is almost certainly why the cabinet rallied around May's Chequers plan. They know No Deal is a catastrophe.

    Fuck Business + NI backstop, Vassal State and ignoring the democratic vote and cancelling the whole thing are viable, but bad, options. No Deal isn't an option at all.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 16,300

    Bleak thread on NATO. And seems highly probable.

    Time for Merkel to get the cheque book out.

    Its what you have to do when you've been caught riding on the train without paying the proper fare.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 10,756
    To summarise:

    Remain: Tory Party screwed
    BINO: Tory Party screwed
    No-deal Brexit: Tory Party screwed

    (Incidentally, what's with this 'BRINO' rather than BINO?)
  • glwglw Posts: 6,044

    Bleak thread on NATO. And seems highly probable.

    I don't really follow UK politics all that much now, Trump and the Special Counsel is what I keep up on. It's amazing how little it seems to lead the UK news, but in the US it's abundantly clear already that Trump's campaign makes Watergate look like a fuss about nothing.

    I've no doubt at all about Trump's guilt, but will he be punished?
  • kjohnwkjohnw Posts: 1,456
    FF43 said:

    currystar said:

    currystar said:

    glw said:

    I hope Theresa May doesn't listen to Radio 5 in the morning, because if she does it will have spoilt her breakfast.

    Sophie in 't Veld (Guy Verhofstadt's deputy) was quite clear that the idea that the UK could pick and choose the four pillars/freedoms was not going to fly. She could not have been clearer, the EU is not going to break up the internal market.

    So what happens if the EU says no? Surely May will be toast.

    Why? It will be a No Deal situation caused by the EU's refusal to negotiate.
    More likely she'd roll over and sign up for single market, vassal state with huge payments
    There is absolutely no chance of that, I rate no deal a 40% chance now.
    We say No Deal. The EU will say, come back when you are ready to talk. When we come back it won't be because the EU has capitulated. The EU will aim to manage the standoff with the least detriment to itself while pressuring us to the table. This is the point where business will have to execute their ultimate contingency plan. It won't be pretty.

    As I said below scorched earth Leavers will want a No Deal last stand because they know they won't get a Brexit anything like the one they campaigned for. It is almost certainly why the cabinet rallied around May's Chequers plan. They know No Deal is a catastrophe.
    we should have insisted no deal=no cash, we lost our leverage when we unconditionally promised 39 billion
  • archer101auarcher101au Posts: 1,612
    FF43 said:

    In brief:

    1. Theresa May needs to get the backstop agreed where there is a potential trade border on the Irish Sea. This unlocks the Article 50 Withdrawal Agreement and a somewhat orderly Brexit.

    2. The only way she can do this is by implying a UK wide deal that makes the NI backstop moot. This looks awfully like vassal state. So she comes up with a fiction of a cakist halfway house furture arrangement (the Chequers statement)

    3. The EU needs to be seen to be considering this proposition just long enough to get the Withdrawal Agreement signed.

    4. The actual agreement won't look anything like Chequers but that happens after we leave the EU and during the "transition". We will probably go for the vassal state rather than Fuck Business + NI backstop.

    5. Very high chance of this going wrong. In this case there will be a full blown crisis in the summer and autumn. Things get uncertain at this point but I don't see a No Deal position lasting more than a few days. At which point probable surrender. There won't be a figleaf of negotiation with the EU.

    6. If you are a scorched earth Leaver, I don't see any reason why you wouldn't force the crisis. We are going to end up in the vassal state anyway. Might as well make a last stand.

    OK I agree we need to focus on the NI backstop. I keep saying that this is still a showstopper.

    You (and I think others) seem to be suggesting that May can sign the NI backstop as drafted by the EU - which allows the separation of NI into the SM/CU. Remember that this backstop lasts forever - so if there is no trade agreement OR there is a trade agreement and the UK pull out or fails to agree a new regulation, the backstop comes into effect.

    As FF43 does point out, the trade agreement by law is not part of the withdrawal agreement. So the answer that the backstop will never be used is legally total nonsense and won't stand up for five seconds.

    I just can't see for one second how the HoC will ever pass this. The DUP will vote against and the Tory backbenchers will go absolutely nuts. May is on record saying she would never sign it. I just don't get how her current plan solves the problem.

    So what are the supporters of May's current plan thinking is going to happen? Will the EU agree a time limited backstop, or a whole-UK permanent backstop. They have absolutely rejected both already. If not, how?
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 13,533
    FF43 said:


    6. If you are a scorched earth Leaver, I don't see any reason why you wouldn't force the crisis. We are going to end up in the vassal state anyway. Might as well make a last stand.

    If they don't currently have the numbers to do TMay in, the natural strategy is to wait until they do. For the reasons you've given, there are plenty more shoes left to drop that will make that job easier.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 25,461

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Why are people complaining about Mrs May ?

    First she got rid of Osborne then she got rid of Boris, she's doing the nation a favour.

    May will be gambelling any Remainer Cameroons who voted Labour or LD or stayed at home at the last general election will return to the fold to offset any Tory voters who will depart for UKIP, Labour or simply stay at home after her Chequers deal.

    Yesterday was the day May's 2 year act portraying being a hard Brexiteer finally died, she is back to being a Cameroon on all but name (minus Osborne who still hates her for personal reasons not surprisingly) and hence she was in such deep discussions with Dave last week
    that's the tories own fault though. They keep selecting MPs who are out of sync with their own supporters.

    The modern conservative party is run by internationalist corporatists with a London bias, they have lost contact with nation first, small business voters in the provinces.

    Camron couls still quite happily have been PM if he had learned to balance the two, instead he chose to demonise chunks of his natural supporters and looked surprised when they stopped voting for him.
    You are correct, there is now a vast difference between the Tory membership and leadership and the Tory voting base and the leadership particularly over Brexit Corbyn for all his faults does not have with his membership and the Labour voting base.

    Which leaves the Tories particularly vulnerable to a UKIP revival, especially if Farage makes good on his promise to return as UKIP leader next March if it really is BINO
    The Tories have known this for a long time. Hence they keep their members away from decision making on policy and have made sure they don't get a full choice of candidates for the leadership.

    If it has been left to Tory members, we would be currently steered through the political rapids by the wise and deft hand of Mrs Leadsom.
    Actually, now you mention it, what exactly would Andrea Leadsom have done that would have been worse than what Theresa May actually did? Surely the worst case scenario is we'd be where we are now, with no deal in sight and a cabinet shipping water?
    That's a good question. Despite the current mess, it would appear that Mrs M is at least trying to make the best of a very bad situation. My instinct is that Mrs L's more blinkered and less deft politics would surely have made things worse somewhere along the line. But you are right that it is difficult to say precisely how.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 32,036

    I just can't see for one second how the HoC will ever pass this. The DUP will vote against and the Tory backbenchers will go absolutely nuts. May is on record saying she would never sign it. I just don't get how her current plan solves the problem.

    So what are the supporters of May's current plan thinking is going to happen? Will the EU agree a time limited backstop, or a whole-UK permanent backstop. They have absolutely rejected both already. If not, how?

    If I'm right about May's intentions then whether the HoC will pass the backstop is irrelevant. They will seek a specific mandate from the people. It also short-circuits any attempt by Corbyn to use this process to bring down the government.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 52,926
    Mr. Palmer, if the 'culture war' (I dislike the term) has not been fed recently then it's because you and the Westminster bubble haven't been paying attention. Rape gangs in Newcastle and Oxford have been sent down relatively recently, the Telford situation appears unresolved, and Westminster types are more comfortable talking about Julia Hartley-Brewer's knee.

    There was surprisingly open and honest reporting about the Rotherham scandal at the time but there's been a shameful reticence since.

    This hasn't gone away, it's just being downplayed. Cressida Dick (whose name suits her well) wibbled the following some months ago.



    The comment from just after 2.40 is particularly ridiculous. In the same way men commit far more murders than women, and women are more likely to be shoplifters, the notion there's no discernible pattern is palpable politically correct bullshit. From 4.25 is particularly depressing.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 22,257

    FF43 said:

    In brief:

    1. Theresa May needs to get the backstop agreed where there is a potential trade border on the Irish Sea. This unlocks the Article 50 Withdrawal Agreement and a somewhat orderly Brexit.

    2. The only way she can do this is by implying a UK wide deal that makes the NI backstop moot. This looks awfully like vassal state. So she comes up with a fiction of a cakist halfway house furture arrangement (the Chequers statement)

    3. The EU needs to be seen to be considering this proposition just long enough to get the Withdrawal Agreement signed.

    4. The actual agreement won't look anything like Chequers but that happens after we leave the EU and during the "transition". We will probably go for the vassal state rather than Fuck Business + NI backstop.

    5.

    6. If you are a scorched earth Leaver, I don't see any reason why you wouldn't force the crisis. We are going to end up in the vassal state anyway. Might as well make a last stand.

    OK I agree we need to focus on the NI backstop. I keep saying that this is still a showstopper.

    You (and I think others) seem to be suggesting that May can sign the NI backstop as drafted by the EU - which allows the separation of NI into the SM/CU. Remember that this backstop lasts forever - so if there is no trade agreement OR there is a trade agreement and the UK pull out or fails to agree a new regulation, the backstop comes into effect.

    As FF43 does point out, the trade agreement by law is not part of the withdrawal agreement. So the answer that the backstop will never be used is legally total nonsense and won't stand up for five seconds.

    I just can't see for one second how the HoC will ever pass this. The DUP will vote against and the Tory backbenchers will go absolutely nuts. May is on record saying she would never sign it. I just don't get how her current plan solves the problem.

    So what are the supporters of May's current plan thinking is going to happen? Will the EU agree a time limited backstop, or a whole-UK permanent backstop. They have absolutely rejected both already. If not, how?
    And as I keep pointing out, that is the very nub of the whole Brexit process. Who knew? Well that man Dave did.

    And as we can see it is what is driving all the rest of it.

    And also as you note, there are only two options, the entire UK remains regulatorily aligned, or some kind of high-fandangled super smart technology and process. The likes of which you described recently.

    As it stands, the one looking more doable is the former.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 30,972

    Bleak thread on NATO. And seems highly probable.

    Time for Merkel to get the cheque book out.

    Its what you have to do when you've been caught riding on the train without paying the proper fare.
    Yes, but it feels like that wont be enough for Trump. He wants out. And so does his best mate Vladimir.

    Seems to me this is a much bigger worry for EU than Brexit.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 13,039
    Do we know why YouGov have only released Tory/Labour/LD figures for their latest poll?
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 33,401
    Johnson having himself photographed as he penned his resignation letter must surely be the final nail in his coffin. What was he thinking?

    Actually, we all know what he was thinking.

  • tlg86 said:

    Do we know why YouGov have only released Tory/Labour/LD figures for their latest poll?

    It is The Times who chose to only release the Con/Lab/LD figure.

    YouGov should be releasing the full details in a bit.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 28,507

    Yes, that's astonishing. I still think that the Leave vote lanced the boil for many people - they felt Something Is Being Done about migration, and they then started feeling more rational about it - what about the nurses and doctors, who's going to pick the fruit, etc. Also, the culture wars haven't been fed lately by new horrors like the Rotherham scandals - a period of people quietly getting on with life without doing anything awful has healed some of the fears.
    The closure of the Jungle in Calais, and Hungary and Croatia sealing their Borders probably made a big difference, too.
  • archer101auarcher101au Posts: 1,612
    LOL. Cameron thought he had Merkel onside for his reforms. Merkel is just another version of May - says whatever she needs to whomever she is talking to if it keeps her safe until the end of the day. Dave lost his whole career believing that Merkel would help him.

    The EU Commission have the power in the EU.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 16,300

    Bleak thread on NATO. And seems highly probable.

    Time for Merkel to get the cheque book out.

    Its what you have to do when you've been caught riding on the train without paying the proper fare.
    Yes, but it feels like that wont be enough for Trump. He wants out. And so does his best mate Vladimir.

    Seems to me this is a much bigger worry for EU than Brexit.
    Trump wants to win and to be seen to have won.

    So its up to Merkel to write a cheque of whatever the required size is.

    If she's not willing to do that then she will have to accept the consequences.
  • volcanopetevolcanopete Posts: 2,078
    Liam Fox and Penny Mordaunt have now both come out as turd polishing sell-outs.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 13,039

    tlg86 said:

    Do we know why YouGov have only released Tory/Labour/LD figures for their latest poll?

    It is The Times who chose to only release the Con/Lab/LD figure.

    YouGov should be releasing the full details in a bit.
    Thanks. This is the first time since the election that both Labour and Tories have been sub 40.
  • archer101auarcher101au Posts: 1,612
    TOPPING said:



    OK I agree we need to focus on the NI backstop. I keep saying that this is still a showstopper.

    You (and I think others) seem to be suggesting that May can sign the NI backstop as drafted by the EU - which allows the separation of NI into the SM/CU. Remember that this backstop lasts forever - so if there is no trade agreement OR there is a trade agreement and the UK pull out or fails to agree a new regulation, the backstop comes into effect.

    As FF43 does point out, the trade agreement by law is not part of the withdrawal agreement. So the answer that the backstop will never be used is legally total nonsense and won't stand up for five seconds.

    I just can't see for one second how the HoC will ever pass this. The DUP will vote against and the Tory backbenchers will go absolutely nuts. May is on record saying she would never sign it. I just don't get how her current plan solves the problem.

    So what are the supporters of May's current plan thinking is going to happen? Will the EU agree a time limited backstop, or a whole-UK permanent backstop. They have absolutely rejected both already. If not, how?

    And as I keep pointing out, that is the very nub of the whole Brexit process. Who knew? Well that man Dave did.

    And as we can see it is what is driving all the rest of it.

    And also as you note, there are only two options, the entire UK remains regulatorily aligned, or some kind of high-fandangled super smart technology and process. The likes of which you described recently.

    As it stands, the one looking more doable is the former.
    You are not really answering the question. The UK remaining aligned may solve the problem in your eyes, but as I pointed out, this would be part of a separate trade agreement, not the withdrawal agreement. And since this agreement is not legally binding until it is signed way in the future, May still needs to agree the backstop text.

    So, what can the backstop text say that will pass the HoC? Because I am absolutely certain that the EU backstop text cannot pass.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 33,401

    Bleak thread on NATO. And seems highly probable.

    Time for Merkel to get the cheque book out.

    Its what you have to do when you've been caught riding on the train without paying the proper fare.
    Yes, but it feels like that wont be enough for Trump. He wants out. And so does his best mate Vladimir.

    Seems to me this is a much bigger worry for EU than Brexit.

    The US pulling out of Europe would be a monumental act of self-harm. It would also run entirely counter to British interests. Trump’s policies are the most explicitly hostile to the UK’s foreign policy and trade aims and objectives than those pursued by any other US president since at least the19th century. It is genuinely amazing how much leeway the British right give him. If the half African Obama was doing it they would be up in arms.

  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 22,257

    TOPPING said:



    OK I agree we need to focus on the NI backstop. I keep saying that this is still a showstopper.

    You (and I think others) seem to be suggesting that May can sign the NI backstop as drafted by the EU - which allows the separation of NI into the SM/CU. Remember that this backstop lasts forever - so if there is no trade agreement OR there is a trade agreement and the UK pull out or fails to agree a new regulation, the backstop comes into effect.

    As FF43 does point out, the trade agreement by law is not part of the withdrawal agreement. So the answer that the backstop will never be used is legally total nonsense and won't stand up for five seconds.

    I just can't see for one second how the HoC will ever pass this. The DUP will vote against and the Tory backbenchers will go absolutely nuts. May is on record saying she would never sign it. I just don't get how her current plan solves the problem.

    So what are the supporters of May's current plan thinking is going to happen? Will the EU agree a time limited backstop, or a whole-UK permanent backstop. They have absolutely rejected both already. If not, how?

    And as I keep pointing out, that is the very nub of the whole Brexit process. Who knew? Well that man Dave did.

    And as we can see it is what is driving all the rest of it.

    And also as you note, there are only two options, the entire UK remains regulatorily aligned, or some kind of high-fandangled super smart technology and process. The likes of which you described recently.

    As it stands, the one looking more doable is the former.
    You are not really answering the question. The UK remaining aligned may solve the problem in your eyes, but as I pointed out, this would be part of a separate trade agreement, not the withdrawal agreement. And since this agreement is not legally binding until it is signed way in the future, May still needs to agree the backstop text.

    So, what can the backstop text say that will pass the HoC? Because I am absolutely certain that the EU backstop text cannot pass.
    What was the question? What will the HoC tolerate? Well the Chequers agreement neatly squares the NI circle and if you exclude the tail of Brex-o-loons, I believe that they will tolerate that.

    "Not what people voted for" is disingenous bolleaux.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 22,257

    Bleak thread on NATO. And seems highly probable.

    Time for Merkel to get the cheque book out.

    Its what you have to do when you've been caught riding on the train without paying the proper fare.
    Yes, but it feels like that wont be enough for Trump. He wants out. And so does his best mate Vladimir.

    Seems to me this is a much bigger worry for EU than Brexit.

    The US pulling out of Europe would be a monumental act of self-harm. It would also run entirely counter to British interests. Trump’s policies are the most explicitly hostile to the UK’s foreign policy and trade aims and objectives than those pursued by any other US president since at least the19th century. It is genuinely amazing how much leeway the British right give him. If the half African Obama was doing it they would be up in arms.

    According to one of Trump's advisers (I think) this morning they have no intention of pulling out of Europe, they just want people to pay up as they see it a fair amount for security.

    They are n-e-g-o-t-i-a-t-i-n-g.

    I mean for a country that has supposedly been hard negotiating for the past two years I am amazed that some people (not you) in the UK are surprised when others actually do the same thing.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 57,994

    Bleak thread on NATO. And seems highly probable.



    But but but but. But nothing, NATO needs to live & die on the 2% commitment per member.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300

    Bleak thread on NATO. And seems highly probable.

    Time for Merkel to get the cheque book out.

    Its what you have to do when you've been caught riding on the train without paying the proper fare.
    Yes, but it feels like that wont be enough for Trump. He wants out. And so does his best mate Vladimir.

    Seems to me this is a much bigger worry for EU than Brexit.
    Trump wants to win and to be seen to have won.

    So its up to Merkel to write a cheque of whatever the required size is.

    If she's not willing to do that then she will have to accept the consequences.
    1. The EU will love it because it strengthens calls for an EU army to replace NATO
    2. Merkel has sort-of agreed to buy some super new French planes that haven't been built
    3. French planes are not made in America so that won't please Trump
  • El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 2,316
    Elliot said:

    15%/10%/15%/30%. From the EU perspective, Corbyn is as problematic as the rest as he won't agree state aid limits.

    I think this is overstated. State aid is fudgeable, and there are countless occasions when it has been fudged. You can't build a union containing the dirigiste French, never mind Italy and its eternal-bailout industries, any other way.

    The EU will compromise on everything apart from the four freedoms. Corbyn should have learned this by now. May is, very belatedly, showing signs of getting it.
  • archer101auarcher101au Posts: 1,612
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:



    OK I agree we need to focus on the NI backstop. I keep saying that this is still a showstopper.

    You (and I think others) seem to be suggesting that May can sign the NI backstop as drafted by the EU - which allows the separation of NI into the SM/CU. Remember that this backstop lasts forever - so if there is no trade agreement OR there is a trade agreement and the UK pull out or fails to agree a new regulation, the backstop comes into effect.

    As FF43 does point out, the trade agreement by law is not part of the withdrawal agreement. So the answer that the backstop will never be used is legally total nonsense and won't stand up for five seconds.

    I just can't see for one second how the HoC will ever pass this. The DUP will vote against and the Tory backbenchers will go absolutely nuts. May is on record saying she would never sign it. I just don't get how her current plan solves the problem.

    So what are the supporters of May's current plan thinking is going to happen? Will the EU agree a time limited backstop, or a whole-UK permanent backstop. They have absolutely rejected both already. If not, how?

    And as I keep pointing out, that is the very nub of the whole Brexit process. Who knew? Well that man Dave did.

    And as we can see it is what is driving all the rest of it.

    And also as you note, there are only two options, the entire UK remains regulatorily aligned, or some kind of high-fandangled super smart technology and process. The likes of which you described recently.

    As it stands, the one looking more doable is the former.
    You are not really answering the question. The UK remaining aligned may solve the problem in your eyes, but as I pointed out, this would be part of a separate trade agreement, not the withdrawal agreement. And since this agreement is not legally binding until it is signed way in the future, May still needs to agree the backstop text.

    So, what can the backstop text say that will pass the HoC? Because I am absolutely certain that the EU backstop text cannot pass.
    What was the question? What will the HoC tolerate? Well the Chequers agreement neatly squares the NI circle and if you exclude the tail of Brex-o-loons, I believe that they will tolerate that.

    "Not what people voted for" is disingenous bolleaux.
    The question is very simple. What text for the NI backstop will be in the WA that can pass in the HoC. Do you have an answer or just more insults? Because this is a Remainer plan, would be a bit embarrassing if it doesn't actually work.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 19,558
    Would you buy a used ballgown from either of those two ... ?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 19,558

    Liam Fox and Penny Mordaunt have now both come out as turd polishing sell-outs.


    Aka pragmatists not loons...
  • GreenHeronGreenHeron Posts: 107
    While the Conservative party talks to itself, the more important aspect - what the people they claim to represent think - is being ignored. The opinion polls over the coming weeks will take on a new importance. Some on here believe that May has played a blinder and that a conservative cabinet without Davis and Johnson is far more backable, so the polling figures should reflect that right?

    I'm unconvinced. While I'm pretty agnostic on what kind of Brexit/otherwise we get from a technical perspective, the people in my personal (mostly middle class northerners) and professional (mostly SME owners and accountants) circle fall broadly into the following categories:

    1. The current deal just about reflects the vote but if Brussels rejects it we should say No Deal.
    2. The Tories are letting the electorate down by diluting Brexit, they will not vote Tory and a Corbyn government is a price worth paying.
    3. Looks like a BINO, a 2nd referendum or a reversal of Article 50 is the likely end result, pleased about this but will not give the tories any credit.
    4. May is shafting us all, and there needs to be a change of leader pronto.

    What we are all agreed on is that ministers have been sidelined by civil servants such as Olly Robbins and that on this aspect at least, the civil service is politically motivated and far from impartial, and that unless the current deal is agreed by Brussels without further dilution Farage/Banks will come again with some vengeance and will take a lot of disaffected tories, split the right and allow Corbyn in with under 40% of the vote.

    Put simply, Theresa May is ignoring her voters, and is likely to play the price in the long term but survive in the short term, is my reading of this. The opinion polls will of course give us a good early pointer.
  • surbysurby Posts: 1,227
    There is only one majority that is possible in the current Parliament:

    With Labour taking over power, in a minority government, Labour introduces a new bill for the UK to remain in the Customs Union.

    1. There are enough MPs in the HoC to agree to that

    2. The HoL will also agree

    3. The UK asks for Art.50 to be postponed to, at least, 31st December 2020. I think this will be agreed.

    4. There should be a two-part vote along the following lines. Both votes taking place on the same day on two ballot papers:

    "The UK has agreed to leave the EU and an agreement has been reached.

    With that information,

    a. Do you wish the UK to Remain in the EU or Leave the EU

    -----------------------------------------

    b. If the country wishes to leave the EU, do you want the UK to leave according to the agreement or leave the EU without any deal"

    The b) vote is only counted if a) says the people wishes to Leave the EU.
  • El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 2,316

    What we are all agreed on is that ministers have been sidelined by civil servants such as Olly Robbins and that on this aspect at least, the civil service is politically motivated and far from impartial

    I'm not agreed on that.

    The Civil Service and the House of Lords are the voices of continuity in how Britain is governed. They are mudweights on change. That can be frustrating but it is, broadly, part of how Britain works and a reflection of our national small-c conservative character.

    They are doing here what they have always done. It's not a case of "far from impartial". If the situation were reversed and we were being swept into Schengen and the Euro by a bunch of impetuous pro-Europeans, the Civil Service would be slowing us down and trying to write in safeguards just the same. It's what they do.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 32,036
    How old are the figures for 2017?
  • ralphmalphralphmalph Posts: 2,201

    While the Conservative party talks to itself, the more important aspect - what the people they claim to represent think - is being ignored. The opinion polls over the coming weeks will take on a new importance. Some on here believe that May has played a blinder and that a conservative cabinet without Davis and Johnson is far more backable, so the polling figures should reflect that right?

    I'm unconvinced. While I'm pretty agnostic on what kind of Brexit/otherwise we get from a technical perspective, the people in my personal (mostly middle class northerners) and professional (mostly SME owners and accountants) circle fall broadly into the following categories:

    1. The current deal just about reflects the vote but if Brussels rejects it we should say No Deal.
    2. The Tories are letting the electorate down by diluting Brexit, they will not vote Tory and a Corbyn government is a price worth paying.
    3. Looks like a BINO, a 2nd referendum or a reversal of Article 50 is the likely end result, pleased about this but will not give the tories any credit.
    4. May is shafting us all, and there needs to be a change of leader pronto.

    What we are all agreed on is that ministers have been sidelined by civil servants such as Olly Robbins and that on this aspect at least, the civil service is politically motivated and far from impartial, and that unless the current deal is agreed by Brussels without further dilution Farage/Banks will come again with some vengeance and will take a lot of disaffected tories, split the right and allow Corbyn in with under 40% of the vote.

    Put simply, Theresa May is ignoring her voters, and is likely to play the price in the long term but survive in the short term, is my reading of this. The opinion polls will of course give us a good early pointer.

    Also I think what Boris does next is key as well. If he tours the studio's and writes articles saying this is a bad deal and he articulates a positive future for the UK on a simple FTA then the Govt is in trouble. Because 1) there is no person in the Cabinet that can do "vision" like Boris, they are the Glum family. 2) Even though London peeps may detest Boris for his role in the the leave campaign, the actual leave voters throughout the country still listen to him and will make time for him.
    There are a lot of Tory MP's in leave areas or areas with large leave votes that would have Boris campaign with them in an instant and refuse to have May, Hammond, Clarke et al any where near their campaign.
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    On those figures there was already a large change in opinion by 2015. So why the large vote for UKIP that year? Why the vote for Brexit in 2016? Why hasn't opinion on Brexit changed as opinion on immigration has changed?

    Something doesn't add up.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 31,558
    Yesterday was utter chaos and it seems today that it is possible to paint a new picture on the politics of all this.

    The cabinet is now much more centrist and better for the loss of David Davis (who I do like) and Boris (who I do not) as Davis who seems to have given up on the process long ago, with only 4 hours of meetings with Barnier this year (just think about that for a moment), had run out of interest and Boris who yet again insulting Foreign leaders yesterday, told Airbus to FO, ducked out of a vote on Heathrow, and generally acted as unreliable self-centred colleague and friend.

    Last night TM received an excellent reception at the 1922 committee meeting with lots of banging of desks and a clear display of support. A VONC did not materialise despite all the huffing and puffing and I do not expect one, at least, until the Autumn as it must be clear to the saner Brexiteers (JRM) that TM would receive a substantial endorsement by her MP’s and that would end any challenge for a year at the least.

    Boris is the party’s Corbyn, loved by the membership, despised by most of the conservative MP’s. In the event TM stands down (unlikely) or eventually loses a challenge Boris is clear favourite to win a membership ballot (I agree with Hyfrud on this) but there would be huge moves by MP’s to keep him off the ballot.

    Personally I do not want him anywhere near the leadership and my team at present would be Sajid Javid with Michael Gove as COE.

    I believe after these tumultuous days the conservatives will receive a polling hit but it is not clear that Labour will receive a boost. Anything could happen but I am sure that a hard Brexit has become much more likely (I genuinely hope not) and remain is no longer an option.

    I see that immigration is becoming much more palatable and that must have to do with the daily reports of the NHS loosing staff because of the Brexit uncertainty and the fact we need 100,000 more NHS workers now. That could in time play more to immigration becoming less of an issue, but only as long as it can be seen to be controlled.

    And finally I have often been accused of being TM cheer leader and in truth I have admired her determination and steel under enormous pressure but I also accept she is a hopeless communicator. I do hope she stays in place for Brexit as I do believe that at this time it is in the National interest but am equalled prepared to throw my hat in the ring for Sajid Javid. However, we do need a new leader before the next election and preferable one to unite the party, not one who would split it (Boris)


  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 19,558

    Yes, that's astonishing. I still think that the Leave vote lanced the boil for many people - they felt Something Is Being Done about migration, and they then started feeling more rational about it - what about the nurses and doctors, who's going to pick the fruit, etc. Also, the culture wars haven't been fed lately by new horrors like the Rotherham scandals - a period of people quietly getting on with life without doing anything awful has healed some of the fears.
    Except that it looks fairly clear that the significant shift in opinion started between 2013 and 2015.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 20,894

    Bleak thread on NATO. And seems highly probable.

    Time for Merkel to get the cheque book out.

    Its what you have to do when you've been caught riding on the train without paying the proper fare.
    Yes, but it feels like that wont be enough for Trump. He wants out. And so does his best mate Vladimir.

    Seems to me this is a much bigger worry for EU than Brexit.

    The US pulling out of Europe would be a monumental act of self-harm. It would also run entirely counter to British interests. Trump’s policies are the most explicitly hostile to the UK’s foreign policy and trade aims and objectives than those pursued by any other US president since at least the19th century. It is genuinely amazing how much leeway the British right give him. If the half African Obama was doing it they would be up in arms.

    Obama the Pacific president was doing it and nobody left or right batted an eye lid
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 42,504
    edited July 2018

    On those figures there was already a large change in opinion by 2015. So why the large vote for UKIP that year? Why the vote for Brexit in 2016? Why hasn't opinion on Brexit changed as opinion on immigration has changed?

    Something doesn't add up.
    The same survey also has this,

    Number of Britons who want UK to leave EU has jumped since the referendum

    Rising numbers of respondents are firmly convinced by the case for departure

    Study said 36 per cent of interviewees wanted to leave the EU, up from 22 per cent in 2015
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143

    Bleak thread on NATO. And seems highly probable.

    Time for Merkel to get the cheque book out.

    Its what you have to do when you've been caught riding on the train without paying the proper fare.
    Yes, but it feels like that wont be enough for Trump. He wants out. And so does his best mate Vladimir.

    Seems to me this is a much bigger worry for EU than Brexit.
    This could be the making of the EU. Every country needs an enemy to define itself against. Abandoned by Trump, with Putin ascendant, the opportunity for the EU to establish itself, to make some creation myths, is there.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 32,036

    Also I think what Boris does next is key as well. If he tours the studio's and writes articles saying this is a bad deal and he articulates a positive future for the UK on a simple FTA then the Govt is in trouble. Because 1) there is no person in the Cabinet that can do "vision" like Boris, they are the Glum family. 2) Even though London peeps may detest Boris for his role in the the leave campaign, the actual leave voters throughout the country still listen to him and will make time for him.
    There are a lot of Tory MP's in leave areas or areas with large leave votes that would have Boris campaign with them in an instant and refuse to have May, Hammond, Clarke et al any where near their campaign.

    Boris Johnson is a total busted flush now. The moment he lost it was when he delivered that heavily trailed Brexit speech last year where people were expecting his "vision" and instead got jokes about stag dos. Without the trappings of office he'll fade into obscurity.
  • GreenHeronGreenHeron Posts: 107

    What we are all agreed on is that ministers have been sidelined by civil servants such as Olly Robbins and that on this aspect at least, the civil service is politically motivated and far from impartial

    I'm not agreed on that.

    The Civil Service and the House of Lords are the voices of continuity in how Britain is governed. They are mudweights on change. That can be frustrating but it is, broadly, part of how Britain works and a reflection of our national small-c conservative character.

    They are doing here what they have always done. It's not a case of "far from impartial". If the situation were reversed and we were being swept into Schengen and the Euro by a bunch of impetuous pro-Europeans, the Civil Service would be slowing us down and trying to write in safeguards just the same. It's what they do.
    There is no doubt some truth in that. The problem is, the country has voted for seismic change and the government has fought an election pledging to deliver that seismic change, which is completely at odds with what you have described. As I have said before, as a remain voter I'd be very content with the technical aspects of a BINO or similar, but as a professional transaction negotiator it is also clear to me that these negotiations have been conducted with the aim of changing as little as possible rather than to obtain the best result - and yes, these are two separate things.
  • kjohnwkjohnw Posts: 1,456

    Also I think what Boris does next is key as well. If he tours the studio's and writes articles saying this is a bad deal and he articulates a positive future for the UK on a simple FTA then the Govt is in trouble. Because 1) there is no person in the Cabinet that can do "vision" like Boris, they are the Glum family. 2) Even though London peeps may detest Boris for his role in the the leave campaign, the actual leave voters throughout the country still listen to him and will make time for him.
    There are a lot of Tory MP's in leave areas or areas with large leave votes that would have Boris campaign with them in an instant and refuse to have May, Hammond, Clarke et al any where near their campaign.

    Boris Johnson is a total busted flush now. The moment he lost it was when he delivered that heavily trailed Brexit speech last year where people were expecting his "vision" and instead got jokes about stag dos. Without the trappings of office he'll fade into obscurity.
    wishful thinking
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    Also I think what Boris does next is key as well. If he tours the studio's and writes articles saying this is a bad deal and he articulates a positive future for the UK on a simple FTA then the Govt is in trouble. Because 1) there is no person in the Cabinet that can do "vision" like Boris, they are the Glum family. 2) Even though London peeps may detest Boris for his role in the the leave campaign, the actual leave voters throughout the country still listen to him and will make time for him.
    There are a lot of Tory MP's in leave areas or areas with large leave votes that would have Boris campaign with them in an instant and refuse to have May, Hammond, Clarke et al any where near their campaign.

    Resigning in an effort to further his career may have been, by accident, the single greatest contribution to good governance BoZo has made since becoming an MP

    Now that they no longer have to keep him onside, cabinet colleagues are free to be much more vocal, and realistic, about the dangers of Fuck Business Brexit.
  • volcanopetevolcanopete Posts: 2,078
    ref.the podcast-it's Mogg v Javid then if left to the members of the Tory party but Mogg with no experience of government is unlikely to make it to the final 2 even with the support of the 80 ERGers.Next in line of Leavers is Gove who is far more likely to get on the ballot for the final showdown.BTW what few members the Tories have left may well feel disenfranchised when Mogg is defeated by Tory MPs.More likely outcome Gove v Javid.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 31,558

    On those figures there was already a large change in opinion by 2015. So why the large vote for UKIP that year? Why the vote for Brexit in 2016? Why hasn't opinion on Brexit changed as opinion on immigration has changed?

    Something doesn't add up.
    The same survey also has this,

    Number of Britons who want UK to leave EU has jumped since the referendum

    Rising numbers of respondents are firmly convinced by the case for departure

    Study said 36 per cent of interviewees wanted to leave the EU, up from 22 per cent in 2015
    It will be interesting if the next polling shows a change towards leave as the last polling showed quite a switch to remain.

    I would expect a polling boost to leave, not least because of the huge publicity the last 24 hours have given to the subject
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 30,523

    Bleak thread on NATO. And seems highly probable.

    Time for Merkel to get the cheque book out.

    Its what you have to do when you've been caught riding on the train without paying the proper fare.
    Yes, but it feels like that wont be enough for Trump. He wants out. And so does his best mate Vladimir.

    Seems to me this is a much bigger worry for EU than Brexit.

    The US pulling out of Europe would be a monumental act of self-harm. It would also run entirely counter to British interests. Trump’s policies are the most explicitly hostile to the UK’s foreign policy and trade aims and objectives than those pursued by any other US president since at least the19th century. It is genuinely amazing how much leeway the British right give him. If the half African Obama was doing it they would be up in arms.

    Self-harm to the USA or harm to Europe?

    America's interests have changed and Europe just isn't that important for the USA now. Their big rival isn't the USSR, it's China. Their most likely battleground isn't Europe, it's the Pacific.

    It may not be pleasant for Europeans that have gotten used to being protected effectively for free by the Americans while simultaneously mocking America's 'Military Industrial Complex' but the reality is that regardless of who is President the Pacific is now more important than the Atlantic for America. That was true under Obama and it's true now.
  • ralphmalphralphmalph Posts: 2,201

    Also I think what Boris does next is key as well. If he tours the studio's and writes articles saying this is a bad deal and he articulates a positive future for the UK on a simple FTA then the Govt is in trouble. Because 1) there is no person in the Cabinet that can do "vision" like Boris, they are the Glum family. 2) Even though London peeps may detest Boris for his role in the the leave campaign, the actual leave voters throughout the country still listen to him and will make time for him.
    There are a lot of Tory MP's in leave areas or areas with large leave votes that would have Boris campaign with them in an instant and refuse to have May, Hammond, Clarke et al any where near their campaign.

    Boris Johnson is a total busted flush now. The moment he lost it was when he delivered that heavily trailed Brexit speech last year where people were expecting his "vision" and instead got jokes about stag dos. Without the trappings of office he'll fade into obscurity.
    You make my point. Whether you made it eloquently or not is up for debate.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 31,558
    What is he talking about. Last time I looked there were over 217,000 being built
  • asjohnstoneasjohnstone Posts: 1,276

    Bleak thread on NATO. And seems highly probable.

    Time for Merkel to get the cheque book out.

    Its what you have to do when you've been caught riding on the train without paying the proper fare.
    Yes, but it feels like that wont be enough for Trump. He wants out. And so does his best mate Vladimir.

    Seems to me this is a much bigger worry for EU than Brexit.
    This could be the making of the EU. Every country needs an enemy to define itself against. Abandoned by Trump, with Putin ascendant, the opportunity for the EU to establish itself, to make some creation myths, is there.
    Putin isn't ascendant, Russia is a joke on the verge of bankruptcy.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 31,558

    ref.the podcast-it's Mogg v Javid then if left to the members of the Tory party but Mogg with no experience of government is unlikely to make it to the final 2 even with the support of the 80 ERGers.Next in line of Leavers is Gove who is far more likely to get on the ballot for the final showdown.BTW what few members the Tories have left may well feel disenfranchised when Mogg is defeated by Tory MPs.More likely outcome Gove v Javid.

    We can only hope

  • ralphmalphralphmalph Posts: 2,201
    Scott_P said:

    Also I think what Boris does next is key as well. If he tours the studio's and writes articles saying this is a bad deal and he articulates a positive future for the UK on a simple FTA then the Govt is in trouble. Because 1) there is no person in the Cabinet that can do "vision" like Boris, they are the Glum family. 2) Even though London peeps may detest Boris for his role in the the leave campaign, the actual leave voters throughout the country still listen to him and will make time for him.
    There are a lot of Tory MP's in leave areas or areas with large leave votes that would have Boris campaign with them in an instant and refuse to have May, Hammond, Clarke et al any where near their campaign.

    Resigning in an effort to further his career may have been, by accident, the single greatest contribution to good governance BoZo has made since becoming an MP

    Now that they no longer have to keep him onside, cabinet colleagues are free to be much more vocal, and realistic, about the dangers of Fuck Business Brexit.
    There are a heck of a lot of voters out there that see big business as crony business, even May recognises this. They have lived with posted workers under cutting wages, etc, etc.
    F business will be OK with them, it is one reason why Corbyn got a hearing.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 30,523
    edited July 2018
    No houses are built? I wonder what all those buildings with 3-5 bedrooms that have been getting built around here are then?
  • ralphmalphralphmalph Posts: 2,201

    What is he talking about. Last time I looked there were over 217,000 being built
    He is one oft these swivel eyed fruitcake remainer loons. The force of extremism is strong with them.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 20,894

    Bleak thread on NATO. And seems highly probable.

    Time for Merkel to get the cheque book out.

    Its what you have to do when you've been caught riding on the train without paying the proper fare.
    Yes, but it feels like that wont be enough for Trump. He wants out. And so does his best mate Vladimir.

    Seems to me this is a much bigger worry for EU than Brexit.

    The US pulling out of Europe would be a monumental act of self-harm. It would also run entirely counter to British interests. Trump’s policies are the most explicitly hostile to the UK’s foreign policy and trade aims and objectives than those pursued by any other US president since at least the19th century. It is genuinely amazing how much leeway the British right give him. If the half African Obama was doing it they would be up in arms.

    Self-harm to the USA or harm to Europe?

    America's interests have changed and Europe just isn't that important for the USA now. Their big rival isn't the USSR, it's China. Their most likely battleground isn't Europe, it's the Pacific.

    It may not be pleasant for Europeans that have gotten used to being protected effectively for free by the Americans while simultaneously mocking America's 'Military Industrial Complex' but the reality is that regardless of who is President the Pacific is now more important than the Atlantic for America. That was true under Obama and it's true now.
    Europe has been taking a peace dividend while Putin has been doing his land grabs. Only piggy backing off the yanks has allowed the Europeans to do this.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 22,257

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:



    OK I agree we need to focus on the NI backstop. I keep saying that this is still a showstopper.

    You (and I think others) seeme agreement and the UK pull out or fails to agree a new regulation, the backstop comes into effect.

    As FF43 does point out, the trade agreement by law is not part of the withdrawal agreement. So the answer that the backstop will never be used is legally total nonsense and won't stand up for five seconds.

    I just can't see for one second how the HoC will ever pass this. The DUP will vote against and the Tory backbenchers will go absolutely nuts. May is on record saying she would never sign it. I just don't get how her current plan solves the problem.

    So what are the supporters of May's current plan thinking is going to happen? Will the EU agree a time limited backstop, or a whole-UK permanent backstop. They have absolutely rejected both already. If not, how?

    And as I keep pointing out, that is the very nub of the whole Brexit process. Who knew? Well that man Dave did.

    And as we can see it is what is driving all the rest of it.

    And also as you note, there are only two options, the entire UK remains regulatorily aligned, or some kind of high-fandangled super smart technology and process. The likes of which you described recently.

    As it stands, the one looking more doable is the former.
    You are not really answering the question. The UK remaining aligned may solve the problem in your eyes, but as I pointed out, this would be part of a separate trade agreement, not the withdrawal agreement. And since this agreement is not legally binding until it is signed way in the future, May still needs to agree the backstop text.

    So, what can the backstop text say that will pass the HoC? Because I am absolutely certain that the EU backstop text cannot pass.
    What was the question? What will the HoC tolerate? Well the Chequers agreement neatly squares the NI circle and if you exclude the tail of Brex-o-loons, I believe that they will tolerate that.

    "Not what people voted for" is disingenous bolleaux.
    The question is very simple. What text for the NI backstop will be in the WA that can pass in the HoC. Do you have an answer or just more insults? Because this is a Remainer plan, would be a bit embarrassing if it doesn't actually work.
    Didn't I answer? If the EU accepts Chequers (big if), then Chequers.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 31,558
    kjohnw said:

    Also I think what Boris does next is key as well. If he tours the studio's a tond writes articles saying this is a bad deal and he articulates a positive future for the UK on a simple FTA then the Govt is in trouble. Because 1) there is no person in the Cabinet that can do "vision" like Boris, they are the Glum family. 2) Even though London peeps may detest Boris for his role in the the leave campaign, the actual leave voters throughout the country still listen to him and will make time for him.
    There are a lot of Tory MP's in leave areas or areas with large leave votes that would have Boris campaign with them in an instant and refuse to have May, Hammond, Clarke et al any where near their campaign.

    Boris Johnson is a total busted flush now. The moment he lost it was when he delivered that heavily trailed Brexit speech last year where people were expecting his "vision" and instead got jokes about stag dos. Without the trappings of office he'll fade into obscurity.
    wishful thinking
    He will not go into obscurity but equally I cannot see him wanting to stay on he backbenches when he could earn a lot more in journalism
  • ralphmalphralphmalph Posts: 2,201

    Bleak thread on NATO. And seems highly probable.

    Time for Merkel to get the cheque book out.

    Its what you have to do when you've been caught riding on the train without paying the proper fare.
    Yes, but it feels like that wont be enough for Trump. He wants out. And so does his best mate Vladimir.

    Seems to me this is a much bigger worry for EU than Brexit.

    The US pulling out of Europe would be a monumental act of self-harm. It would also run entirely counter to British interests. Trump’s policies are the most explicitly hostile to the UK’s foreign policy and trade aims and objectives than those pursued by any other US president since at least the19th century. It is genuinely amazing how much leeway the British right give him. If the half African Obama was doing it they would be up in arms.

    Self-harm to the USA or harm to Europe?

    America's interests have changed and Europe just isn't that important for the USA now. Their big rival isn't the USSR, it's China. Their most likely battleground isn't Europe, it's the Pacific.

    It may not be pleasant for Europeans that have gotten used to being protected effectively for free by the Americans while simultaneously mocking America's 'Military Industrial Complex' but the reality is that regardless of who is President the Pacific is now more important than the Atlantic for America. That was true under Obama and it's true now.
    Europe has been taking a peace dividend while Putin has been doing his land grabs. Only piggy backing off the yanks has allowed the Europeans to do this.
    Also with Merkel and the rest of the EU (with the exception of Poland) buying Russian gas in huge quantities, they are proving the hard currency for Putin's military expansion, then bleating you must protect us, you must protect us. No wonder the sherman taxpayer is hacked off.
This discussion has been closed.