It won't end his leadership. The rest is true, but having reluctantly done what the party wants he'll be fine.
What if he doesn't?
I don't believe he will hold firm. The party is begging him to do it, and given the Tories' situation he could be PM in a few months. He's not throwing that away, not now. He's not the same person who sat on the backbenches for 30 years. He's had years to get close to power.
To be honest you have been consistent in your view that Corbyn will move on a referendum but there is no evidence he or his inner circle will and indeed many of his mps in leave seats are vocally opposed to it
And May has been consistent that it is her way or nothing, but she's going to come up with a plan B now isn't she?
I was not talking about TM to be fair
The same point applies. Corbyn will be absolutely for his way and only his way..until he changes his way.
Anecdote alert - I know one previous non voter who, after voting for the first time ever in the referendum and then the GE, now says they'll never vote again because what is the point the Commons will just do what it always wanted.
Since they voted leave, this is a good sign for Remain.
Remain would win a people’s vote on a depressed turnout.
She seemed to think she would face a leadership challenge once it was lost, and that by pulling the vote she'd avoid it.
And her move worked pretty well, didn't it? The Brexiteers got all excited and went off early, creating a terrible, sticky mess all over themselves. Now they can't work their way up to another round until next Xmas.
If they'd waited, they'd be in a better position now. If I was a conspiracy theorist (which I'm not), I'd ask whether Graham Brady's 48th letter had a Maidenhead postmark!
Wouldn't have counted. Or rather, would have been treated as a resignation.
I'm sure it didn't happen, but actually I don't think you're right.
The letters to Brady had to say words to the effect "I think there should be a vote of confidence in the Conservative leader".
So an MP could - and possibly one or two did - write "I loathe Rees-Mogg and would relish the chance to humiliating him by voting for the PM in a vote of confidence... so bring it on."
Lots of talk of VONC and elections but let’s be honest it is not a runner.
What have we learned tonight?
First, May’s Deal is off the table absolutely. The scale of defeat is literally unprecedented, and no fudging to the political wording of the Deal is going to save it.
Second, May is not going to run down the clock. She has rightly recognised that as an utterly irresponsible course of action.
Third, she has committed to finding a form of Brexit which Parliament can agree upon.
Others have a better read on both the maths and the leaning of MPs than me. However, let us assume she can rely on 200 votes, and further there is no way now to access the votes of 70 ERGers.
She needs to find another 120 votes for a majority. However she will also need to find something which is not total anathema to her Party.
To me, that implies a preference order of Norway, then a 2nd referendum, then a permanent customs union.
I think each of these potentially have the numbers.
Oh sure, but she would no longer be leader of the Conservative Party whilst bringing them to the vote
AND Don't forget those Cabinet members who see themselves as her replacement want a party left to lead and in all probability will have to face a membership vote where 75%+ voted leave and now very heavily favour No deal.
Lots of talk of VONC and elections but let’s be honest it is not a runner.
What have we learned tonight?
First, May’s Deal is off the table absolutely. The scale of defeat is literally unprecedented, and no fudging to the political wording of the Deal is going to save it.
Second, May is not going to run down the clock. She has rightly recognised that as an utterly irresponsible course of action.
Third, she has committed to finding a form of Brexit which Parliament can agree upon.
Others have a better read on both the maths and the leaning of MPs than me. However, let us assume she can rely on 200 votes, and further there is no way now to access the votes of 70 ERGers.
She needs to find another 120 votes for a majority. However she will also need to find something which is not total anathema to her Party.
To me, that implies a preference order of Norway, then a 2nd referendum, then a permanent customs union.
I think each of these potentially have the numbers.
Oh sure, but she would no longer be leader of the Conservative Party whilst bringing them to the vote
AND Don't forget those Cabinet members who see themselves as her replacement want a party left to lead and in all probability will have to face a membership vote where 75%+ voted leave and now very heavily favour No deal.
I'm struggling to think of any good legislation that Cameron introduced.
Gay marriage looks like being his only positive legacy.....
It was however quite a botched and divisive piece of legislation.
I'm not sure it's divisive. Even in these culture war times, I don't think anybody outside UKIP wants to repeal it
It's potentially divisive on a micro level, as it forces (afaik) places of worship to solemnise same sex marriages. A system whereby marriage in the eyes of the state was available to couples of all gender combinations, and marriage in the eyes of God, was an addition that was free for the places of worship to determine, would have been universally acceptable.
I regret the outcome of the #Brexit vote. After the vote the ball is now with the British lower house in #London. In any case, there will be no renegotiation of the withdrawal agreement
Incidentally who is funding this irritating* People's Vote Again Till You Do What We Tell You outfit? The Leavers were louder per capita even if they were totally outnumbered, but the Remainers had the sound system. And the giant video screens. And the professionally produced graphics. And films.
How long would it take in an emergency (such as the clock ticking under the 14 days in the FTPA) for the Conservatives to change their rules to allow them to force out a leader who refused to resign?
Why should she resign? In December she carried the confidence of the Party and tomorrow she will carry the confidence of the House. She is perfectly secure. To sit in the big chair pretending to be a prime minister as the same people who will have twice voted confidence in her will continue to vote against literally anything she proposes.
It is likely that she will continue to carry the confidence of the House, but as it depends entirely on the DUP it can't be assured forever. My question was hypothetical based on a scenario that the DUP had changed their minds. i.e. at that point are there any circumstances where the Conservative Party might be able to force May to jump rather than be forced into a GE following the loss of a confidence vote.
I'm struggling to think of any good legislation that Cameron introduced.
I'm struggling to see how the Fixed Term Parliaments Act has much to do with it.
Pre-2013 we're in the same position except that the period between loss of a confidence motion and an election (or new confidence motion) was of indeterminate length.
The position on the Government losing a big vote like this, but without a motion of no confidence being passed (which seems the likely outcome here), is identical. A Government which can survive a motion of confidence can stagger on to the five year mark exactly as it could pre-2013.
Big difference is that pre-FTPA the government could make something like tonight's vote a confidence motion. That would have broken the deadlock one way or another.
As it is we have a government which cannot get it's most important business through and yet which cannot be removed.
Anecdote alert - I know one previous non voter who, after voting for the first time ever in the referendum and then the GE, now says they'll never vote again because what is the point the Commons will just do what it always wanted.
Since they voted leave, this is a good sign for Remain.
Which is why Leavers would be better off boycotting another referendum. A large chunk of the leave vote will stay at home as given a remainer majority parliament didn't respect the 2016 result there is no reason to believe they would accept another leave win.
A leave boycott (which would also depress remain turnout given the result would be a forgone conclusion) would deprive it of legitimacy and a remain "victory" well short of the 17.4 million Leave got in 2016. Remainers wouldn't care of course but a new Conservative leader could later win a majority promising to reverse the "Brexit betrayal" and implement the 2016 result.
I'm struggling to think of any good legislation that Cameron introduced.
Gay marriage looks like being his only positive legacy.....
It was however quite a botched and divisive piece of legislation.
I'm not sure it's divisive. Even in these culture war times, I don't think anybody outside UKIP wants to repeal it
It's potentially divisive on a micro level, as it forces (afaik) places of worship to solemnise same sex marriages. A system whereby marriage in the eyes of the state was available to couples of all gender combinations, and marriage in the eyes of God, was an addition that was free for the places of worship to determine, would have been universally acceptable.
No it didn't. Religious institutes remain totally free to pick and choose who they wish to allow to have a religious wedding service.
Lots of talk of VONC and elections but let’s be honest it is not a runner.
What have we learned tonight?
First, May’s Deal is off the table absolutely. The scale of defeat is literally unprecedented, and no fudging to the political wording of the Deal is going to save it.
Second, May is not going to run down the clock. She has rightly recognised that as an utterly irresponsible course of action.
Third, she has committed to finding a form of Brexit which Parliament can agree upon.
Others have a better read on both the maths and the leaning of MPs than me. However, let us assume she can rely on 200 votes, and further there is no way now to access the votes of 70 ERGers.
She needs to find another 120 votes for a majority. However she will also need to find something which is not total anathema to her Party.
To me, that implies a preference order of Norway, then a 2nd referendum, then a permanent customs union.
I think each of these potentially have the numbers.
The irony is that the Brexiteers have defeated a fairly hard deal and we will end up with something much more soft. Norway would be my choice.
Lots of talk of VONC and elections but let’s be honest it is not a runner.
What have we learned tonight?
First, May’s Deal is off the table absolutely. The scale of defeat is literally unprecedented, and no fudging to the political wording of the Deal is going to save it.
Second, May is not going to run down the clock. She has rightly recognised that as an utterly irresponsible course of action.
Third, she has committed to finding a form of Brexit which Parliament can agree upon.
Others have a better read on both the maths and the leaning of MPs than me. However, let us assume she can rely on 200 votes, and further there is no way now to access the votes of 70 ERGers.
She needs to find another 120 votes for a majority. However she will also need to find something which is not total anathema to her Party.
To me, that implies a preference order of Norway, then a 2nd referendum, then a permanent customs union.
I think each of these potentially have the numbers.
If May does have 200 votes in the bag whatever, I suspect any of Norway, a referendum or a permanent customs union would attract enough Labour MPs to get her over the line.
I don't. Labour want to take power. Why would they vote with her?
Labour would back a permanent customs union because that is its policy. There would be plenty of rebels ready to back the other two.
It's a fig leaf. Labour want power and that's that.
Anecdote alert - I know one previous non voter who, after voting for the first time ever in the referendum and then the GE, now says they'll never vote again because what is the point the Commons will just do what it always wanted.
Since they voted leave, this is a good sign for Remain.
Remain would win a people’s vote on a depressed turnout.
How many of the cabinet will be thinking about having a quiet word withTM tonight and asking her to step down.
What does her resigning solve?
It gives the Tories their best chance of avoiding Corbyn & McDonnell in Downing St
Depends who it is. An ERG type is not going to get a deal through. A no deal Brexit surely guarantees a Corbyn government if it goes badly.
The parliamentary party who get to decide the short list is heavily Remain biased. The membership are generally Leave supporters. Tough situation. The 3 from runners seem to be Raab, Javid and Hunt. Raab would the best choice out of those 3 in my view. Not all Tory Leavers are ERG supporters. As many Leavers don’t want Boris as do so he wouldn’t make the short list.
By failing to put in the hard yards and come up with a credible plan of their own the ERG are really not credible. Too many would be back seat drivers.
It won't end his leadership. The rest is true, but having reluctantly done what the party wants he'll be fine.
What if he doesn't?
I don't believe he will hold firm. The party is begging him to do it, and given the Tories' situation he could be PM in a few months. He's not throwing that away, not now. He's not the same person who sat on the backbenches for 30 years. He's had years to get close to power.
To be honest you have been consistent in your view that Corbyn will move on a referendum but there is no evidence he or his inner circle will and indeed many of his mps in leave seats are vocally opposed to it
And May has been consistent that it is her way or nothing, but she's going to come up with a plan B now isn't she?
Corbyn is leader of the Labour Party in name only. McD, a remainer, will ensure the peoples vote happens.
It won't end his leadership. The rest is true, but having reluctantly done what the party wants he'll be fine.
What if he doesn't?
I don't believe he will hold firm. The party is begging him to do it, and given the Tories' situation he could be PM in a few months. He's not throwing that away, not now. He's not the same person who sat on the backbenches for 30 years. He's had years to get close to power.
To be honest you have been consistent in your view that Corbyn will move on a referendum but there is no evidence he or his inner circle will and indeed many of his mps in leave seats are vocally opposed to it
And May has been consistent that it is her way or nothing, but she's going to come up with a plan B now isn't she?
Corbyn is leader of the Labour Party in name only. McD, a remainer, will ensure the peoples vote happens.
How many of the cabinet will be thinking about having a quiet word withTM tonight and asking her to step down.
What does her resigning solve?
It gives the Tories their best chance of avoiding Corbyn & McDonnell in Downing St
Depends who it is. An ERG type is not going to get a deal through. A no deal Brexit surely guarantees a Corbyn government if it goes badly.
The parliamentary party who get to decide the short list is heavily Remain biased. The membership are generally Leave supporters. Tough situation. The 3 from runners seem to be Raab, Javid and Hunt. Raab would the best choice out of those 3 in my view. Not all Tory Leavers are ERG supporters. As many Leavers don’t want Boris as do so he wouldn’t make the short list.
By failing to put in the hard yards and come up with a credible plan of their own the ERG are really not credible. Too many would be back seat drivers.
Unless a unity candidate emerged (which seems extremely unlikely) even if May resigned tonight the next Tory leader wouldn't be selected until way past March 29th.
I'm struggling to think of any good legislation that Cameron introduced.
I'm struggling to see how the Fixed Term Parliaments Act has much to do with it.
Pre-2013 we're in the same position except that the period between loss of a confidence motion and an election (or new confidence motion) was of indeterminate length.
The position on the Government losing a big vote like this, but without a motion of no confidence being passed (which seems the likely outcome here), is identical. A Government which can survive a motion of confidence can stagger on to the five year mark exactly as it could pre-2013.
Big difference is that pre-FTPA the government could make something like tonight's vote a confidence motion. That would have broken the deadlock one way or another.
As it is we have a government which cannot get it's most important business through and yet which cannot be removed.
Given the likelihood of defeat, why would the Government have made it a confidence motion pre-2013?
And, even if they did, they'd not be obliged to do anything about it. Practice has been to either resign as a Government (where an alternative exists) or advise the monarch to dissolve Parliament. But there was no compulsion at all and I don't think the monarch has ever (post restoration) dissolved without a request.
I'm struggling to think of any good legislation that Cameron introduced.
I'm struggling to see how the Fixed Term Parliaments Act has much to do with it.
Pre-2013 we're in the same position except that the period between loss of a confidence motion and an election (or new confidence motion) was of indeterminate length.
The position on the Government losing a big vote like this, but without a motion of no confidence being passed (which seems the likely outcome here), is identical. A Government which can survive a motion of confidence can stagger on to the five year mark exactly as it could pre-2013.
Big difference is that pre-FTPA the government could make something like tonight's vote a confidence motion. That would have broken the deadlock one way or another.
As it is we have a government which cannot get it's most important business through and yet which cannot be removed.
Given the likelihood of defeat, why would the Government have made it a confidence motion pre-2013?
And, even if they did, they'd not be obliged to do anything about it. Practice has been to either resign as a Government (where an alternative exists) or advise the monarch to dissolve Parliament. But there was no compulsion at all and I don't think the monarch has ever (post restoration) dissolved without a request.
"Given the likelihood of defeat, why would the Government have made it a confidence motion..."?
Beacuse making it a confidence motion would almost certainly have pulled the ERG into line.
How many of the cabinet will be thinking about having a quiet word withTM tonight and asking her to step down.
What does her resigning solve?
It gives the Tories their best chance of avoiding Corbyn & McDonnell in Downing St
Depends who it is. An ERG type is not going to get a deal through. A no deal Brexit surely guarantees a Corbyn government if it goes badly.
The parliamentary party who get to decide the short list is heavily Remain biased. The membership are generally Leave supporters. Tough situation. The 3 from runners seem to be Raab, Javid and Hunt. Raab would the best choice out of those 3 in my view. Not all Tory Leavers are ERG supporters. As many Leavers don’t want Boris as do so he wouldn’t make the short list.
By failing to put in the hard yards and come up with a credible plan of their own the ERG are really not credible. Too many would be back seat drivers.
Unless a unity candidate emerged (which seems extremely unlikely) even if May resigned tonight the next Tory leader wouldn't be selected until way past March 29th.
Difficult to see any unity between the JRM’s and Anna Soubry’s of the Party, particularly if Brexit is the only issue on the agenda.
It won't end his leadership. The rest is true, but having reluctantly done what the party wants he'll be fine.
What if he doesn't?
I don't believe he will hold firm. The party is begging him to do it, and given the Tories' situation he could be PM in a few months. He's not throwing that away, not now. He's not the same person who sat on the backbenches for 30 years. He's had years to get close to power.
He doesn't want power, with that comes responsibility. The militant tendency are much happier sniping from the sidelines, marching with other associated smug radicals and complaining about Tory conspiracies. Corbyn is their Crown (or should that be clown?) Prince.
Comments
I gather it's proving quite hard.
FFS Francis.
What an utter shit.
And then celebrate like it’s May 1945.
The letters to Brady had to say words to the effect "I think there should be a vote of confidence in the Conservative leader".
So an MP could - and possibly one or two did - write "I loathe Rees-Mogg and would relish the chance to humiliating him by voting for the PM in a vote of confidence... so bring it on."
In her speech after the vote she managed to surpass "citizens of nowhere" by stating that "those who voted for Brexit must be reassured"
And fuck everybody else...
I regret the outcome of the #Brexit vote. After the vote the ball is now with the British lower house in #London. In any case, there will be no renegotiation of the withdrawal agreement
a) Remain
b) Leave
As it is we have a government which cannot get it's most important business through and yet which cannot be removed.
A leave boycott (which would also depress remain turnout given the result would be a forgone conclusion) would deprive it of legitimacy and a remain "victory" well short of the 17.4 million Leave got in 2016. Remainers wouldn't care of course but a new Conservative leader could later win a majority promising to reverse the "Brexit betrayal" and implement the 2016 result.
By failing to put in the hard yards and come up with a credible plan of their own the ERG are really not credible. Too many would be back seat drivers.
And, even if they did, they'd not be obliged to do anything about it. Practice has been to either resign as a Government (where an alternative exists) or advise the monarch to dissolve Parliament. But there was no compulsion at all and I don't think the monarch has ever (post restoration) dissolved without a request.
Some choice; some democracy!
Beacuse making it a confidence motion would almost certainly have pulled the ERG into line.
What sort of democracy is it where you vote for change and then the status quo carries on?