Not likely but the thing I like about Pezza is he is prepared to speculate and be provocative.
Unlike Laura The Borer.
It's possible. If standing order 14 remains in force and Theresa May won't budge on her Withdrawal Agreement, then pro-EU MPs will have to think of creative ways to get rid of her. Otherwise, the clock runs down and they either have to swallow the Deal or watch Hard Brexit happen.
A gross failure to reach agreement followed by Deal or No Deal, or a small breakaway by Tory Hard Remainers (eight should be sufficient) both seem more likely, but a major realignment isn't impossible. The barriers to it are high: party loyalty, abandoning the party name and organisation to the rump left behind, and the need for the move to be co-ordinated so that a trap isn't sprung (where only one side splits and it ends up being routed by the other in a GE.) But there are also advantages for centrist MPs - jettisoning the ERG wing on one side, escaping the control of Corbyn on the other - so if they get desperate enough then they might just end up giving it a go.
They can split in the Commons and give themselves three years to sort out the details.
Fantasy politics. But, as you say, who knows?
That's one thing that can't realistically happen. Once it had sorted out Brexit, a GNU would be an alliance of two moderate but ideologically opposed parties with no other common platform and no popular mandate. A General Election would be necessary later in the year.
It's not going to happen but if May was brave there is a logically consistent way out of this mess.
May should make a speech tomorrow saying she respects Parliament's decision that it has made, but that the decision of the British people in the referendum's decision must also be made. That at the start of this process that she said that no deal would be better than a bad deal, so with reluctance with Parliament determining this is a bad deal she will now be concentrating on no deal preparations. However if the EU can address Parliament's concerns in a legally binding manner, specifically with regards to the backstop, that an amended deal could be brought back to Parliament. Either way we continue to leave on 29 March 2019.
[Over to you Juncker/Barnier/Varadkar]
+1
-1 from me.....just to equalise stuff...
this is a very British problem- we need to sort our shit out first-
I wasn’t aware one could negate the teeth-grindingly awful PB meme of +1.
I’ll submit another -1.
You're a hypocrite - a few minutes earlier you were chortling over the Cameron 'chaos with Ed M' tweet meme. You don't dislike memes, you just dislike some others like. Why do you think your memes deserve to be chuckled at but others condemned?
And +1 isn't even a meme for crying out loud. It's just people indicating they really liked a statement, as there's no like button.
Important point: so long as Corbyn keeps running confidence votes on a loop, he doesn't have to admit that his attempt to secure a General Election has failed - so the party's policy of moving on to look at other options (e.g. the dreaded second referendum) can be safely set fire to and dropped into the nearest bin.
And all the time, the countdown to No Deal continues...
Given the cult still think he is anti-Brexit, I am sure this stunt will go down well with them. Its those bastard Tories and the bankers again stopping Corbyn revolutionizing the corrupt system.
Important point: so long as Corbyn keeps running confidence votes on a loop, he doesn't have to admit that his attempt to secure a General Election has failed - so the party's policy of moving on to look at other options (e.g. the dreaded second referendum) can be safely set fire to and dropped into the nearest bin.
And all the time, the countdown to No Deal continues...
Maybe, but he's not exactly going to be fooling anyone after the third failed VONC
It's funny how even a totally expected outcome can still hit like a punch in the gut.
That's how I felt about David Cameron's announcing his resignation.
I'm not sure if I've recovered or ever will.
Oh, I'm sure that the emotional wounds will heal with time :-)
David Cameron wrecked his career and half-a-century of UK foreign policy, all for the sake of trying to solve his party's little Farage problem.
If his long-awaited memoirs ultimately reveal that Cameron was, in fact, a closet Eurosceptic all along then his actions might have had some sensible, from that standpoint, rationale to them. But somehow I doubt it.
The man's a fool.
When Cameron was our MP, he would frequently pronounce that our little town - the one place that consistently voted Lib Dem in his overwhelming Tory constituency - was "disputatious" and "argumentative". He once said that "I can be flavour of the month in Westminster and everyone's applauding me, then I come back here and you tell me precisely what I've done wrong and why I'll never amount to anything."
All very affectionately - he liked us and, as a constituency MP, we liked him: we asked him back to open our new Community Centre the other year and he gave a terrific speech. But he'd have to drive past the EU flags fluttering from houses in the town to get there.
Important point: so long as Corbyn keeps running confidence votes on a loop, he doesn't have to admit that his attempt to secure a General Election has failed - so the party's policy of moving on to look at other options (e.g. the dreaded second referendum) can be safely set fire to and dropped into the nearest bin.
And all the time, the countdown to No Deal continues...
Labour may find the other parties decide to act responsibly and not support a series of vonc
Important point: so long as Corbyn keeps running confidence votes on a loop, he doesn't have to admit that his attempt to secure a General Election has failed - so the party's policy of moving on to look at other options (e.g. the dreaded second referendum) can be safely set fire to and dropped into the nearest bin.
And all the time, the countdown to No Deal continues...
Maybe, but he's not exactly going to be fooling anyone after the third failed VONC
Two years and a good chunk of people are still fooled into thinking he is doing everything possible to stop Brexit....
DD still seeing unicorns in front of his eyes, as he claims, yet again, that German car manufacturers will force EU to renegotiated.
Did he actually go to Brussels at all?
He was sat in Green Park eating a sandwich and doing a sudoku when everyone thought he was in Bruxelles like one of those blokes that get made redundant and can't tell their Mrs.
Important point: so long as Corbyn keeps running confidence votes on a loop, he doesn't have to admit that his attempt to secure a General Election has failed - so the party's policy of moving on to look at other options (e.g. the dreaded second referendum) can be safely set fire to and dropped into the nearest bin.
And all the time, the countdown to No Deal continues...
Why does Corbyn want to run the clock down for May? He'd end up carrying the can for No Deal.
Not likely but the thing I like about Pezza is he is prepared to speculate and be provocative.
Unlike Laura The Borer.
It's possible. If standing order 14 remains in force and Theresa May won't budge on her Withdrawal Agreement, then pro-EU MPs will have to think of creative ways to get rid of her. Otherwise, the clock runs down and they either have to swallow the Deal or watch Hard Brexit happen.
A gross failure to reach agreement followed by Deal or No Deal, or a small breakaway by Tory Hard Remainers (eight should be sufficient) both seem more likely, but a major realignment isn't impossible. The barriers to it are high: party loyalty, abandoning the party name and organisation to the rump left behind, and the need for the move to be co-ordinated so that a trap isn't sprung (where only one side splits and it ends up being routed by the other in a GE.) But there are also advantages for centrist MPs - jettisoning the ERG wing on one side, escaping the control of Corbyn on the other - so if they get desperate enough then they might just end up giving it a go.
They can split in the Commons and give themselves three years to sort out the details.
Fantasy politics. But, as you say, who knows?
That's one thing that can't realistically happen. Once it had sorted out Brexit, a GNU would be an alliance of two moderate but ideologically opposed parties with no other common platform and no popular mandate. A General Election would be necessary later in the year.
The Labour and Tory moderates aren’t massively apart politically
Important point: so long as Corbyn keeps running confidence votes on a loop, he doesn't have to admit that his attempt to secure a General Election has failed - so the party's policy of moving on to look at other options (e.g. the dreaded second referendum) can be safely set fire to and dropped into the nearest bin.
And all the time, the countdown to No Deal continues...
Maybe, but he's not exactly going to be fooling anyone after the third failed VONC
Two years and a good chunk of people are still fooled into thinking he is doing everything possible to stop Brexit....
It's funny how even a totally expected outcome can still hit like a punch in the gut.
That's how I felt about David Cameron's announcing his resignation.
I'm not sure if I've recovered or ever will.
Oh, I'm sure that the emotional wounds will heal with time :-)
David Cameron wrecked his career and half-a-century of UK foreign policy, all for the sake of trying to solve his party's little Farage problem.
If his long-awaited memoirs ultimately reveal that Cameron was, in fact, a closet Eurosceptic all along then his actions might have had some sensible, from that standpoint, rationale to them. But somehow I doubt it.
The man's a fool.
When Cameron was our MP, he would frequently pronounce that our little town - the one place that consistently voted Lib Dem in his overwhelming Tory constituency - was "disputatious" and "argumentative". He once said that "I can be flavour of the month in Westminster and everyone's applauding me, then I come back here and you tell me precisely what I've done wrong and why I'll never amount to anything."
All very affectionately - he liked us and, as a constituency MP, we liked him: we asked him back to open our new Community Centre the other year and he gave a terrific speech. But he'd have to drive past the EU flags fluttering from houses in the town to get there.
In other news, there has been a development Chez Nabavi which I didn't see coming. My winnings (hat-tip Alastair) on the Meaningful Vote have been arbitrarily clobbered by a McDonnell-style 100% Windfall Tax and allocated to buying Champagne for an upcoming family evening. Admittedly this isn't as bad as the last such windfall tax, when 70% of the winnings were appropriated for a ride-on lawnmower rather than being available for claret as I had intended.
Important point: so long as Corbyn keeps running confidence votes on a loop, he doesn't have to admit that his attempt to secure a General Election has failed - so the party's policy of moving on to look at other options (e.g. the dreaded second referendum) can be safely set fire to and dropped into the nearest bin.
And all the time, the countdown to No Deal continues...
Labour may find the other parties decide to act responsibly and not support a series of vonc
It would very rapidly make a sideshow from a farce if Corbyn kept tabling losing voncs. It will run out of steam soon enough.
He hasn't displayed any to get brexit over the line
I think that shortly TM will go to Brussels, some improvements may be offered, then the EU will state this is the end state of the deal, will not re-open discussions with anyone including labour, and that A50 can only be deferred until the 18th April, the date the EU elections commence
There are increasing reports that the EU believes a lengthier A50 extension is going to be needed in any event. Even if the Deal is signed, there may not be enough time left for the UK Parliament to get the Withdrawal Agreement and all of the associated legislation onto the statute book.
Quite how they intend to work their way around the European Parliament elections isn't yet clear. Still looks like a serious headache for both sides save in the case of revocation.
I think that the EU might be prepared to renegotiate as well, but only if (a) it were with the aim of securing an Andrex Soft Brexit, and (b) if there were already evidence from votes in the House of Commons that a firm majority existed for such a solution.
It's not going to happen but if May was brave there is a logically consistent way out of this mess.
May should make a speech tomorrow saying she respects Parliament's decision that it has made, but that the decision of the British people in the referendum's decision must also be made. That at the start of this process that she said that no deal would be better than a bad deal, so with reluctance with Parliament determining this is a bad deal she will now be concentrating on no deal preparations. However if the EU can address Parliament's concerns in a legally binding manner, specifically with regards to the backstop, that an amended deal could be brought back to Parliament. Either way we continue to leave on 29 March 2019.
[Over to you Juncker/Barnier/Varadkar]
+1
-1 from me.....just to equalise stuff...
this is a very British problem- we need to sort our shit out first-
I wasn’t aware one could negate the teeth-grindingly awful PB meme of +1.
I’ll submit another -1.
You're a hypocrite - a few minutes earlier you were chortling over the Cameron 'chaos with Ed M' tweet meme. You don't dislike memes, you just dislike some others like. Why do you think your memes deserve to be chuckled at but others condemned?
And +1 isn't even a meme for crying out loud. It's just people indicating they really liked a statement, as there's no like button.
Some memes are great.
+1 is tiresome internetese.
Avoid.
The only thing more tiresome than Anazina’s posts about how other people express themselves on the internet is the way our wretched political class has handled Brexit.
I’m not going to waste any more time thinking about something over which I have no control. See you guys in a month.
Corbyn didn't really have a choice, May forced his hand - he couldn't back down after she not only challenged him but also said she would allow other parties to submit if not.
It will perhaps help May somewhat but at the end of the day, a temporary bounce won't change the situation she's in, and he can keep calling votes when she's weaker and no deal approaches.
He hasn't displayed any to get brexit over the line
I think that shortly TM will go to Brussels, some improvements may be offered, then the EU will state this is the end state of the deal, will not re-open discussions with anyone including labour, and that A50 can only be deferred until the 18th April, the date the EU elections commence
There are increasing reports that the EU believes a lengthier A50 extension is going to be needed in any event. Even if the Deal is signed, there may not be enough time left for the UK Parliament to get the Withdrawal Agreement and all of the associated legislation onto the statute book.
Quite how they intend to work their way around the European Parliament elections isn't yet clear. Still looks like a serious headache for both sides save in the case of revocation.
I think that the EU might be prepared to renegotiate as well, but only if (a) it were with the aim of securing an Andrex Soft Brexit, and (b) if there were already evidence from votes in the House of Commons that a firm majority existed for such a solution.
Given the cult still think he is anti-Brexit, I am sure this stunt will go down well with them. Its those bastard Tories and the bankers again stopping Corbyn revolutionizing the corrupt system.
He really is Britain's Trump, as with Trump reality is completely at odds with what his supporters think of him. Susceptibility to cult-like behaviour must be surprisingly common in the general population.
Important point: so long as Corbyn keeps running confidence votes on a loop, he doesn't have to admit that his attempt to secure a General Election has failed - so the party's policy of moving on to look at other options (e.g. the dreaded second referendum) can be safely set fire to and dropped into the nearest bin.
And all the time, the countdown to No Deal continues...
Why does Corbyn want to run the clock down for May? He'd end up carrying the can for No Deal.
I think his acolytes will blame May. Remember, many of them think he's a remainer.
Important point: so long as Corbyn keeps running confidence votes on a loop, he doesn't have to admit that his attempt to secure a General Election has failed - so the party's policy of moving on to look at other options (e.g. the dreaded second referendum) can be safely set fire to and dropped into the nearest bin.
And all the time, the countdown to No Deal continues...
Labour may find the other parties decide to act responsibly and not support a series of vonc
It would very rapidly make a sideshow from a farce if Corbyn kept tabling losing voncs. It will run out of steam soon enough.
I believe the Blessed Margaret called 27 before success.
Important point: so long as Corbyn keeps running confidence votes on a loop, he doesn't have to admit that his attempt to secure a General Election has failed - so the party's policy of moving on to look at other options (e.g. the dreaded second referendum) can be safely set fire to and dropped into the nearest bin.
And all the time, the countdown to No Deal continues...
Labour may find the other parties decide to act responsibly and not support a series of vonc
It would very rapidly make a sideshow from a farce if Corbyn kept tabling losing voncs. It will run out of steam soon enough.
I believe the Blessed Margaret called 27 before success.
Quite how they intend to work their way around the European Parliament elections isn't yet clear. Still looks like a serious headache for both sides save in the case of revocation.
It's entirely clear how they intend to do that, since a plan covering that specific eventuality has already been passed by the Council of Ministers and the European Parliament.
Well a historic day and Parliament have made a complete horlicks of brexit
If TM wins tomorrow and carries on as PM I will admit I have no idea how she squares the circle between remain and leave
May is not even part of the problem now; she is the problem. She has no authority in her party or cabinet and no credibility with the EU. Whatever happens now will have to be led by somebody else. She is done.
Important point: so long as Corbyn keeps running confidence votes on a loop, he doesn't have to admit that his attempt to secure a General Election has failed - so the party's policy of moving on to look at other options (e.g. the dreaded second referendum) can be safely set fire to and dropped into the nearest bin.
And all the time, the countdown to No Deal continues...
Why does Corbyn want to run the clock down for May? He'd end up carrying the can for No Deal.
I guess the rationale is that May is the PM, she carries the can for failing to get a Deal through and has to clean up any mess afterwards. Labour's position could always be "if you'd done the decent thing and stood down, we would've done a better job."
Beyond that, Corbyn is an old Left Eurosceptic. If he can get out of the EU *and* make the Tories carry the can for any and all negative consequences of leaving, I'd've thought that he'd be very happy.
Quite how they intend to work their way around the European Parliament elections isn't yet clear. Still looks like a serious headache for both sides save in the case of revocation.
It's entirely clear how they intend to do that, since a plan covering that specific eventuality has already been passed by the Council of Ministers and the European Parliament.
I'm guessing that you didn't read the 538 article where he was less than 100% enthusiastic about her chances...
Sure I read it, basically his theory is that you need multiple constituencies within the Democratic Party (he has an axis that rather mysteriously pits "millenials" against "left", for example) and KLOBUCHAR isn't left, black or latino.
Dunno, he could be right, but my theory is that Democrats of all factions and creeds really, really want to beat Trump.
Sadly its loyalists like us. Time to embrace No Deal and get this over with G.
I can never embrace no deal. It horrifies me
Short term pain for long term gain.
It'll destroy the eurosceptic movement forever.
All those quotes by them that No Deal was Project Fear/That WTO will be awesome will haunt them, worse than Brown's 'We abolished boom and bust'.
If we get no deal and very little of significance to Joe Public actually changes (as is pretty obviously going to be the case), some people (the same people who told us that the country would be a smoking ruin in 24hrs after the vote, and talked of punishment budgets etc.) are going to find themselves wearing an awful lot of egg on their faces!
Don't feed the (new) troll
What's trollish about that post?
It is a logical although "if" is doing a lot of work. You disagree with the comments in parentheses but that doesn't make it trolling.
Well a historic day and Parliament have made a complete horlicks of brexit
If TM wins tomorrow and carries on as PM I will admit I have no idea how she squares the circle between remain and leave
May is not even part of the problem now; she is the problem. She has no authority in her party or cabinet and no credibility with the EU. Whatever happens now will have to be led by somebody else. She is done.
Consider the possible alternative that she is the only example of 'not the problem'.
Well a historic day and Parliament have made a complete horlicks of brexit
If TM wins tomorrow and carries on as PM I will admit I have no idea how she squares the circle between remain and leave
May is not even part of the problem now; she is the problem. She has no authority in her party or cabinet and no credibility with the EU. Whatever happens now will have to be led by somebody else. She is done.
Consider the possible alternative that she is the only example of 'not the problem'.
It's not going to happen but if May was brave there is a logically consistent way out of this mess.
May should make a speech tomorrow saying she respects Parliament's decision that it has made, but that the decision of the British people in the referendum's decision must also be made. That at the start of this process that she said that no deal would be better than a bad deal, so with reluctance with Parliament determining this is a bad deal she will now be concentrating on no deal preparations. However if the EU can address Parliament's concerns in a legally binding manner, specifically with regards to the backstop, that an amended deal could be brought back to Parliament. Either way we continue to leave on 29 March 2019.
[Over to you Juncker/Barnier/Varadkar]
Two problems:
1) Juncker/Barnier/Varadkar would immediately and unanimously say lol no 2) The deal still wouldn't pass the House of Commons
1) Then we no deal and lets see Varadkar put up his hard border.
2) I think it would. The stated reason why well over one hundred MPs voted no having been dealt with.
You'd have 50 Tory MP's opposing it, regardless.
The Backstop's not the only objection.
Who would still oppose it even with the backstop dealt with? Its the backstop Boris, JRM and many others have been underpinning all their key objections on.
The transition was agreed in principle very early on. Its the backstop that is unbearable.
1. Continuity Remain (Grieve, Allen ,Soubry, Wollaston, Gyimah, Lee, Jo Johnson, Bebb,)
Well a historic day and Parliament have made a complete horlicks of brexit
If TM wins tomorrow and carries on as PM I will admit I have no idea how she squares the circle between remain and leave
May is not even part of the problem now; she is the problem. She has no authority in her party or cabinet and no credibility with the EU. Whatever happens now will have to be led by somebody else. She is done.
In order for someone else to take over, she needs to go first. If she won't go voluntarily then she will have to be removed in a successful VoNC. That would require Parliamentary defections from her own side.
I think it'll more likely than not happen, because some Conservative MPs seem very determined to stop Brexit and find themselves, variously, in positions where they could resume lucrative careers outside Parliament, are at serious risk of deselection or of losing their seats at the next GE regardless, are nearing retirement, or could stand a decent chance of survival by defecting to other parties. But it's far from a done deal.
Important point: so long as Corbyn keeps running confidence votes on a loop, he doesn't have to admit that his attempt to secure a General Election has failed - so the party's policy of moving on to look at other options (e.g. the dreaded second referendum) can be safely set fire to and dropped into the nearest bin.
And all the time, the countdown to No Deal continues...
Labour may find the other parties decide to act responsibly and not support a series of vonc
It would very rapidly make a sideshow from a farce if Corbyn kept tabling losing voncs. It will run out of steam soon enough.
I believe the Blessed Margaret called 27 before success.
I thought it was more like five over a four year period.
Important point: so long as Corbyn keeps running confidence votes on a loop, he doesn't have to admit that his attempt to secure a General Election has failed - so the party's policy of moving on to look at other options (e.g. the dreaded second referendum) can be safely set fire to and dropped into the nearest bin.
And all the time, the countdown to No Deal continues...
Labour may find the other parties decide to act responsibly and not support a series of vonc
It would very rapidly make a sideshow from a farce if Corbyn kept tabling losing voncs. It will run out of steam soon enough.
I believe the Blessed Margaret called 27 before success.
Doesn't this vote make No Deal more - rather than less - likely? It's the law after all. And there seems to be no way in which Parliament can pass a law annulling it and either revoking or extending Article 50.
MPs still seem oblivious to the fact that the EU Withdrawal Act they all voted for is a No Deal Brexit.
Quite how they intend to work their way around the European Parliament elections isn't yet clear. Still looks like a serious headache for both sides save in the case of revocation.
It's entirely clear how they intend to do that, since a plan covering that specific eventuality has already been passed by the Council of Ministers and the European Parliament.
Really? Any idea what the fudge is?
There's no fudge. There's a new calculation for the number of seats per country. If the British are still there come the election, you keep using the old one.
Well a historic day and Parliament have made a complete horlicks of brexit
If TM wins tomorrow and carries on as PM I will admit I have no idea how she squares the circle between remain and leave
May is not even part of the problem now; she is the problem. She has no authority in her party or cabinet and no credibility with the EU. Whatever happens now will have to be led by somebody else. She is done.
Consider the possible alternative that she is the only example of 'not the problem'.
Oh she's a problem, but the fact is all the problems are because parliament is horribly divided. Even being crap would not be such an issue if parliament were sufficiently united. Her going should happen but it's not about to make things suddenly easy.
Conservative MPs, including Cabinet Ministers need to watch their backs with their local Conservative Associations if they want to be selected as candidates at the next general election.
Also those aspiring to be Conservative leader will not need to be seen as remainers in any way and certainly not sabotaging leaving the EU cleanly.
Important point: so long as Corbyn keeps running confidence votes on a loop, he doesn't have to admit that his attempt to secure a General Election has failed - so the party's policy of moving on to look at other options (e.g. the dreaded second referendum) can be safely set fire to and dropped into the nearest bin.
And all the time, the countdown to No Deal continues...
Labour may find the other parties decide to act responsibly and not support a series of vonc
It would very rapidly make a sideshow from a farce if Corbyn kept tabling losing voncs. It will run out of steam soon enough.
I believe the Blessed Margaret called 27 before success.
11 March 1976 - PM, Wilson, opened; LOpp, Thatcher, responded. 9 June 1976 - LOpp, Thatcher, opened; PM, Callaghan, responded. 23 March 1977 - LOpp, Thatcher, opened; PM, Callaghan, responded. 20 July 1977 - PM, Callaghan, opened; LOpp, Thatcher, responded. 14 December 1978 - PM, Callaghan, opened; LOpp, Thatcher, responded. 28 March 1979 - LOpp, Thatcher, opened; PM, Callaghan, responded.
Dates of the Confidence/No Confidence motions during the period of Thatcher of LOTO
Not quite 27 is it???
Indeed not all of them were tabled by Thatcher - the 1978 one was called as a Confidence vote by Callaghan. The March 76 and July 77 votes were on Government adjournment motions.
So that looks like 3 VoNC motions tabled by Thatcher over 4 years.
Doesn't this vote make No Deal more - rather than less - likely? It's the law after all. And there seems to be no way in which Parliament can pass a law annulling it and either revoking or extending Article 50.
MPs still seem oblivious to the fact that the EU Withdrawal Act they all voted for is a No Deal Brexit.
They need a plan, a united front, the numbers in the Commons, and to be willing and able to both vote May out of office and sideline Corbyn if they get in the way. Lots to accomplish, very little time.
Doesn't this vote make No Deal more - rather than less - likely? It's the law after all. And there seems to be no way in which Parliament can pass a law annulling it and either revoking or extending Article 50.
MPs still seem oblivious to the fact that the EU Withdrawal Act they all voted for is a No Deal Brexit.
Or am I missing something obvious?
They'd rather pretend it's all Mays fault. There's plenty to lay at her door. But not that.
Well a historic day and Parliament have made a complete horlicks of brexit
If TM wins tomorrow and carries on as PM I will admit I have no idea how she squares the circle between remain and leave
May is not even part of the problem now; she is the problem. She has no authority in her party or cabinet and no credibility with the EU. Whatever happens now will have to be led by somebody else. She is done.
In order for someone else to take over, she needs to go first. If she won't go voluntarily then she will have to be removed in a successful VoNC. That would require Parliamentary defections from her own side.
I think it'll more likely than not happen, because some Conservative MPs seem very determined to stop Brexit and find themselves, variously, in positions where they could resume lucrative careers outside Parliament, are at serious risk of deselection or of losing their seats at the next GE regardless, are nearing retirement, or could stand a decent chance of survival by defecting to other parties. But it's far from a done deal.
Just to add to the humour, if May is VONC'd and loses...she still can't be forced out of the Con leadership until December. Stuff be weird, now.
Quite how they intend to work their way around the European Parliament elections isn't yet clear. Still looks like a serious headache for both sides save in the case of revocation.
It's entirely clear how they intend to do that, since a plan covering that specific eventuality has already been passed by the Council of Ministers and the European Parliament.
Really? Any idea what the fudge is?
There's no fudge. There's a new calculation for the number of seats per country. If the British are still there come the election, you keep using the old one.
Hmmmm... haven't some of the UK seats already been reallocated to other countries?
Oh well, if they can reverse said reallocation relatively easily then I guess that solves the problem. Won't make us very popular with the countries and candidates done out of the extra seats, but then again I don't imagine we'll be flavour of the month for about the next 20 years even if we do end up staying in.
11 March 1976 - PM, Wilson, opened; LOpp, Thatcher, responded. 9 June 1976 - LOpp, Thatcher, opened; PM, Callaghan, responded. 23 March 1977 - LOpp, Thatcher, opened; PM, Callaghan, responded. 20 July 1977 - PM, Callaghan, opened; LOpp, Thatcher, responded. 14 December 1978 - PM, Callaghan, opened; LOpp, Thatcher, responded. 28 March 1979 - LOpp, Thatcher, opened; PM, Callaghan, responded.
Dates of the Confidence/No Confidence motions during the period of Thatcher of LOTO
Not quite 27 is it???
Indeed not all of them were tabled by Thatcher - the 1978 one was called as a Confidence vote by Callaghan. The March 76 and July 77 votes were on Government adjournment motions.
So that looks like 3 VoNC motions tabled by Thatcher over 4 years.
From your list it looks like Harold Wilson called the first of the six, presumably as a valedictorian act before disappearing for reasons unknown.
Note: I assumed the 27 was a tease by Dixie, his point being that Thatcher Milk Snatcher did table several voncs in her time. However, I maintain that Corbo doing so endlessly is unwise.
Doesn't this vote make No Deal more - rather than less - likely? It's the law after all. And there seems to be no way in which Parliament can pass a law annulling it and either revoking or extending Article 50.
MPs still seem oblivious to the fact that the EU Withdrawal Act they all voted for is a No Deal Brexit.
Or am I missing something obvious?
No, you are quite correct.
She is missing the obvious that there is a huge anti No Deal majority in the Commons, and that will usually finds a way,
Doesn't this vote make No Deal more - rather than less - likely? It's the law after all. And there seems to be no way in which Parliament can pass a law annulling it and either revoking or extending Article 50.
MPs still seem oblivious to the fact that the EU Withdrawal Act they all voted for is a No Deal Brexit.
Or am I missing something obvious?
To avoid no deal the minimum we need to do is to *extend* A50. Requesting an extension is currently a perogative power but as we have seen recently with Humble Addresses, Contempt of Parliament, rejecting draft International Treaties and Government Business motions the Commons are flexing their muscles. The question is whether there is the *will* to extend rather than no deal. If there is the mechanics will be sorted out.
Kinnock is an idiot. Just because he doesn't think No Deal is a good option for the country doesn't automatically preclude it from being an option on the ballot paper. It is his opinion, not fact. My opinion is he's an idiot - that doesn't make it fact.
Well a historic day and Parliament have made a complete horlicks of brexit
If TM wins tomorrow and carries on as PM I will admit I have no idea how she squares the circle between remain and leave
May is not even part of the problem now; she is the problem. She has no authority in her party or cabinet and no credibility with the EU. Whatever happens now will have to be led by somebody else. She is done.
In order for someone else to take over, she needs to go first. If she won't go voluntarily then she will have to be removed in a successful VoNC. That would require Parliamentary defections from her own side.
I think it'll more likely than not happen, because some Conservative MPs seem very determined to stop Brexit and find themselves, variously, in positions where they could resume lucrative careers outside Parliament, are at serious risk of deselection or of losing their seats at the next GE regardless, are nearing retirement, or could stand a decent chance of survival by defecting to other parties. But it's far from a done deal.
Just to add to the humour, if May is VONC'd and loses...she still can't be forced out of the Con leadership until December. Stuff be weird, now.
Well a historic day and Parliament have made a complete horlicks of brexit
If TM wins tomorrow and carries on as PM I will admit I have no idea how she squares the circle between remain and leave
May is not even part of the problem now; she is the problem. She has no authority in her party or cabinet and no credibility with the EU. Whatever happens now will have to be led by somebody else. She is done.
In order for someone else to take over, she needs to go first. If she won't go voluntarily then she will have to be removed in a successful VoNC. That would require Parliamentary defections from her own side.
I think it'll more likely than not happen, because some Conservative MPs seem very determined to stop Brexit and find themselves, variously, in positions where they could resume lucrative careers outside Parliament, are at serious risk of deselection or of losing their seats at the next GE regardless, are nearing retirement, or could stand a decent chance of survival by defecting to other parties. But it's far from a done deal.
Just to add to the humour, if May is VONC'd and loses...she still can't be forced out of the Con leadership until December. Stuff be weird, now.
Of course she can, the 1 year thing is an internal party rule that 50% + 1 mp can scrap at any time; it wasn't written on golden tablets by god and delivered by an Archangel.
Quite how they intend to work their way around the European Parliament elections isn't yet clear. Still looks like a serious headache for both sides save in the case of revocation.
It's entirely clear how they intend to do that, since a plan covering that specific eventuality has already been passed by the Council of Ministers and the European Parliament.
Really? Any idea what the fudge is?
There's no fudge. There's a new calculation for the number of seats per country. If the British are still there come the election, you keep using the old one.
Hmmmm... haven't some of the UK seats already been reallocated to other countries?
Oh well, if they can reverse said reallocation relatively easily then I guess that solves the problem. Won't make us very popular with the countries and candidates done out of the extra seats, but then again I don't imagine we'll be flavour of the month for about the next 20 years even if we do end up staying in.
Some are reallocated in the new allocation, but that hasn't taken effect yet, because Britain is still in the EU. It doesn't need *reversing* because it hasn't taken effect yet, and the text that brings it in says it only takes effect if Britain leaves. Some countries get a little bit fewer than they'd get if the British hurried up and fucked off, but it's not a big difference - most of the British seats get eliminated rather than reallocated.
11 March 1976 - PM, Wilson, opened; LOpp, Thatcher, responded. 9 June 1976 - LOpp, Thatcher, opened; PM, Callaghan, responded. 23 March 1977 - LOpp, Thatcher, opened; PM, Callaghan, responded. 20 July 1977 - PM, Callaghan, opened; LOpp, Thatcher, responded. 14 December 1978 - PM, Callaghan, opened; LOpp, Thatcher, responded. 28 March 1979 - LOpp, Thatcher, opened; PM, Callaghan, responded.
Dates of the Confidence/No Confidence motions during the period of Thatcher of LOTO
Not quite 27 is it???
Indeed not all of them were tabled by Thatcher - the 1978 one was called as a Confidence vote by Callaghan. The March 76 and July 77 votes were on Government adjournment motions.
So that looks like 3 VoNC motions tabled by Thatcher over 4 years.
From your list it looks like Harold Wilson called the first of the six, presumably as a valedictorian act before disappearing for reasons unknown.
Note: I assumed the 27 was a tease by Dixie, his point being that Thatcher Milk Snatcher did table several voncs in her time. However, I maintain that Corbo doing so endlessly is unwise.
Quite how they intend to work their way around the European Parliament elections isn't yet clear. Still looks like a serious headache for both sides save in the case of revocation.
It's entirely clear how they intend to do that, since a plan covering that specific eventuality has already been passed by the Council of Ministers and the European Parliament.
Really? Any idea what the fudge is?
There's no fudge. There's a new calculation for the number of seats per country. If the British are still there come the election, you keep using the old one.
Hmmmm... haven't some of the UK seats already been reallocated to other countries?
Oh well, if they can reverse said reallocation relatively easily then I guess that solves the problem. Won't make us very popular with the countries and candidates done out of the extra seats, but then again I don't imagine we'll be flavour of the month for about the next 20 years even if we do end up staying in.
Some are reallocated in the new allocation, but that hasn't taken effect yet, because Britain is still in the EU. Some countries get a little bit fewer than they'd get of the British hurried up and fucked off, but it's not a big difference - most of the British seats get eliminated rathee than reallocated.
Technically they have only reallocated 27 of the UK's 73 seats and kept the rermaining 46 for future enlargements (e.g. Serbia and Montenegro joining).
France and Spain get an extra 5 each, Italy and the Netherlands get 3, Ireland 2 and the others either get 1 extra or stay the same. Given most countries elect using national or regional party lists it wouldn't be that difficult to revert back to the old numbers even up to election day. Its a bit messier say in Ireland which votes by STV - but they haven't altered their constituency boundaries just added extra seats in 2 of the 3.
So it would be quite easy to revert back and the UK elect its 73 MEPs for as long as is required. One big advantage of the EU not allowing first past the post or AV to be used for their elections!
Re delaying Brexit - surely the way it'll happen is the Standing Orders will get suspended and someone (not the Govt) will bring in a one line Bill delaying Article 50.
It'll say nothing more than that - so nothing for anyone but the hardliners to disagree with - and it'll therefore pass.
Both front benches will have to vote for it.
Bercow will actually be doing Govt a favour - because would be hard for Govt to introduce such a Bill - but if someone else does then job is done for them.
It's not going to happen but if May was brave there is a logically consistent way out of this mess.
May should make a speech tomorrow saying she respects Parliament's decision that it has made, but that the decision of the British people in the referendum's decision must also be made. That at the start of this process that she said that no deal would be better than a bad deal, so with reluctance with Parliament determining this is a bad deal she will now be concentrating on no deal preparations. However if the EU can address Parliament's concerns in a legally binding manner, specifically with regards to the backstop, that an amended deal could be brought back to Parliament. Either way we continue to leave on 29 March 2019.
[Over to you Juncker/Barnier/Varadkar]
+1
-1 from me.....just to equalise stuff...
this is a very British problem- we need to sort our shit out first-
I wasn’t aware one could negate the teeth-grindingly awful PB meme of +1.
I’ll submit another -1.
You're a hypocrite - a few minutes earlier you were chortling over the Cameron 'chaos with Ed M' tweet meme. You don't dislike memes, you just dislike some others like. Why do you think your memes deserve to be chuckled at but others condemned?
And +1 isn't even a meme for crying out loud. It's just people indicating they really liked a statement, as there's no like button.
Well a historic day and Parliament have made a complete horlicks of brexit
If TM wins tomorrow and carries on as PM I will admit I have no idea how she squares the circle between remain and leave
May is not even part of the problem now; she is the problem. She has no authority in her party or cabinet and no credibility with the EU. Whatever happens now will have to be led by somebody else. She is done.
In order for someone else to take over, she needs to go first. If she won't go voluntarily then she will have to be removed in a successful VoNC. That would require Parliamentary defections from her own side.
I think it'll more likely than not happen, because some Conservative MPs seem very determined to stop Brexit and find themselves, variously, in positions where they could resume lucrative careers outside Parliament, are at serious risk of deselection or of losing their seats at the next GE regardless, are nearing retirement, or could stand a decent chance of survival by defecting to other parties. But it's far from a done deal.
Just to add to the humour, if May is VONC'd and loses...she still can't be forced out of the Con leadership until December. Stuff be weird, now.
Really? Why not?
IIUC, Con leaders who survive a leadership challenge cannot again be challenged for a year.
Kinnock is an idiot. Just because he doesn't think No Deal is a good option for the country doesn't automatically preclude it from being an option on the ballot paper. It is his opinion, not fact. My opinion is he's an idiot - that doesn't make it fact.
Would his mother and father lose their £140k a year inflation proofed EU pensions if we left without a deal?!!
Stephen is going to get a very generous inheritance thanks to the European taxpayer one day - as the Kinnocks must have a lot of spare cash to save every month! Who can blame him for loving the EU so much.
Quite how they intend to work their way around the European Parliament elections isn't yet clear. Still looks like a serious headache for both sides save in the case of revocation.
It's entirely clear how they intend to do that, since a plan covering that specific eventuality has already been passed by the Council of Ministers and the European Parliament.
Really? Any idea what the fudge is?
There's no fudge. There's a new calculation for the number of seats per country. If the British are still there come the election, you keep using the old one.
Hmmmm... haven't some of the UK seats already been reallocated to other countries?
Oh well, if they can reverse said reallocation relatively easily then I guess that solves the problem. Won't make us very popular with the countries and candidates done out of the extra seats, but then again I don't imagine we'll be flavour of the month for about the next 20 years even if we do end up staying in.
Some are reallocated in the new allocation, but that hasn't taken effect yet, because Britain is still in the EU. Some countries get a little bit fewer than they'd get of the British hurried up and fucked off, but it's not a big difference - most of the British seats get eliminated rathee than reallocated.
Technically they have only reallocated 27 of the UK's 73 seats and kept the rermaining 46 for future enlargements (e.g. Serbia and Montenegro joining).
France and Spain get an extra 5 each, Italy and the Netherlands get 3, Ireland 2 and the others either get 1 extra or stay the same. Given most countries elect using national or regional party lists it wouldn't be that difficult to revert back to the old numbers even up to election day. Its a bit messier say in Ireland which votes by STV - but they haven't altered their constituency boundaries just added extra seats in 2 of the 3.
So it would be quite easy to revert back and the UK elect its 73 MEPs for as long as is required. One big advantage of the EU not allowing first past the post or AV to be used for their elections!
It's fun watching all these British people bemused at the idea that politicians have considered a possibility in advance and taken care of it without drama.
Quite how they intend to work their way around the European Parliament elections isn't yet clear. Still looks like a serious headache for both sides save in the case of revocation.
It's entirely clear how they intend to do that, since a plan covering that specific eventuality has already been passed by the Council of Ministers and the European Parliament.
Really? Any idea what the fudge is?
There's no fudge. There's a new calculation for the number of seats per country. If the British are still there come the election, you keep using the old one.
Hmmmm... haven't some of the UK seats already been reallocated to other countries?
Oh well, if they can reverse said reallocation relatively easily then I guess that solves the problem. Won't make us very popular with the countries and candidates done out of the extra seats, but then again I don't imagine we'll be flavour of the month for about the next 20 years even if we do end up staying in.
Some are reallocated in the new allocation, but that hasn't taken effect yet, because Britain is still in the EU. Some countries get a little bit fewer than they'd get of the British hurried up and fucked off, but it's not a big difference - most of the British seats get eliminated rathee than reallocated.
Technically they have only reallocated 27 of the UK's 73 seats and kept the rermaining 46 for future enlargements (e.g. Serbia and Montenegro joining).
France and Spain get an extra 5 each, Italy and the Netherlands get 3, Ireland 2 and the others either get 1 extra or stay the same. Given most countries elect using national or regional party lists it wouldn't be that difficult to revert back to the old numbers even up to election day. Its a bit messier say in Ireland which votes by STV - but they haven't altered their constituency boundaries just added extra seats in 2 of the 3.
So it would be quite easy to revert back and the UK elect its 73 MEPs for as long as is required. One big advantage of the EU not allowing first past the post or AV to be used for their elections!
It's fun watching all these British people bemused at the idea that politicians have considered a possibility in advance and taken care of it without drama.
Apparently the EU treaties only allow a maximum of 751 seats in the parliament - a rather odd number! Shame we didn't ever have such a rule for the House of Lords.
Quite how they intend to work their way around the European Parliament elections isn't yet clear. Still looks like a serious headache for both sides save in the case of revocation.
It's entirely clear how they intend to do that, since a plan covering that specific eventuality has already been passed by the Council of Ministers and the European Parliament.
Really? Any idea what the fudge is?
There's no fudge. There's a new calculation for the number of seats per country. If the British are still there come the election, you keep using the old one.
Hmmmm... haven't some of the UK seats already been reallocated to other countries?
Oh well, if they can reverse said reallocation relatively easily then I guess that solves the problem. Won't make us very popular with the countries and candidates done out of the extra seats, but then again I don't imagine we'll be flavour of the month for about the next 20 years even if we do end up staying in.
Some are reallocated in the new allocation, but that hasn't taken effect yet, because Britain is still in the EU. Some countries get a little bit fewer than they'd get of the British hurried up and fucked off, but it's not a big difference - most of the British seats get eliminated rathee than reallocated.
Technically they have only reallocated 27 of the UK's 73 seats and kept the rermaining 46 for future enlargements (e.g. Serbia and Montenegro joining).
France and Spain get an extra 5 each, Italy and the Netherlands get 3, Ireland 2 and the others either get 1 extra or stay the same. Given most countries elect using national or regional party lists it wouldn't be that difficult to revert back to the old numbers even up to election day. Its a bit messier say in Ireland which votes by STV - but they haven't altered their constituency boundaries just added extra seats in 2 of the 3.
So it would be quite easy to revert back and the UK elect its 73 MEPs for as long as is required. One big advantage of the EU not allowing first past the post or AV to be used for their elections!
It's fun watching all these British people bemused at the idea that politicians have considered a possibility in advance and taken care of it without drama.
Apparently the EU treaties only allow a maximum of 751 seats in the parliament - a rather odd number! Shame we didn't ever have such a rule for the House of Lords.
To avoid no deal the minimum we need to do is to *extend* A50. Requesting an extension is currently a perogative power but as we have seen recently with Humble Addresses, Contempt of Parliament, rejecting draft International Treaties and Government Business motions the Commons are flexing their muscles. The question is whether there is the *will* to extend rather than no deal. If there is the mechanics will be sorted out.
Is the 'we' extending A50 the government, the opposition or a random backbencher?
If only May has the authority to extend/revoke A50 then I do not see how parliament can force the government to bend to its will if it doesn't so wish.
It seems to me that there is an awful lot of hopeful conjecture and supposition dressed as fact at the moment.
Hmm. My mp voted for the deal, but also the Baron amendment. A mixed bag then.
By my estimates your MP is one of the following 9 people - that is something they will be able to tell their grandkids (if they have them). I was one of the famous 9 who voted Aye twice!
Davies, Chris Field, Frank Hart, Simon Johnson, Dr Caroline Leigh, Sir Edward Murrison, Dr Andrew Parish, Neil Percy, Andrew Wood, Mike
Well a historic day and Parliament have made a complete horlicks of brexit
If TM wins tomorrow and carries on as PM I will admit I have no idea how she squares the circle between remain and leave
May is not even part of the problem now; she is the problem. She has no authority in her party or cabinet and no credibility with the EU. Whatever happens now will have to be led by somebody else. She is done.
Well a historic day and Parliament have made a complete horlicks of brexit
If TM wins tomorrow and carries on as PM I will admit I have no idea how she squares the circle between remain and leave
May is not even part of the problem now; she is the problem. She has no authority in her party or cabinet and no credibility with the EU. Whatever happens now will have to be led by somebody else. She is done.
But who?
Mike Hancock, obviously. He is the best they have.
More changes in Brussels - Gerard Batten (UKIP Leader) and two other UKIP MEPs have left Farage's EFDD group and joined the Europe of Freedom and Nations group which is led by Le Pen, Wilders and Salvini.
If we do remain in the EU and participate in the May elections it will interesting to see how many UKIP/ex UKIP party lists will run candidates!
"........The Leave vote was not more popular among the low skilled, but rather among individuals with intermediate levels of education (A-Levels and GCSE high grades), especially when their socio-economic position was perceived to be declining and/or to be stagnant. These findings point to an alternative narrative to that of the left behind.
This argument of the squeezed middle being behind Brexit raises new questions about how the new politics of inequality influences voting, for it shows that Brexit was the expression of a widely felt social malaise that affects ample segments of the population."
I'm guessing that you didn't read the 538 article where he was less than 100% enthusiastic about her chances...
Sure I read it, basically his theory is that you need multiple constituencies within the Democratic Party (he has an axis that rather mysteriously pits "millenials" against "left", for example) and KLOBUCHAR isn't left, black or latino.
Dunno, he could be right, but my theory is that Democrats of all factions and creeds really, really want to beat Trump.
No, his argument is that she hasn't ENTHUSED any of those groups.
If I wanted to beat Trump, I'd skip the oldies (bye Biden and Sanders). Skip the weirdos (Gabbard, Brooker). And find a proven election winner who can appeal to the people Trump won by accident last time.
Step forward...
Sherrod Brown or John Hickenlooper
But I find the logic for backing Beto or Harris reasonably strong.
To avoid no deal the minimum we need to do is to *extend* A50. Requesting an extension is currently a perogative power but as we have seen recently with Humble Addresses, Contempt of Parliament, rejecting draft International Treaties and Government Business motions the Commons are flexing their muscles. The question is whether there is the *will* to extend rather than no deal. If there is the mechanics will be sorted out.
Is the 'we' extending A50 the government, the opposition or a random backbencher?
If only May has the authority to extend/revoke A50 then I do not see how parliament can force the government to bend to its will if it doesn't so wish.
It seems to me that there is an awful lot of hopeful conjecture and supposition dressed as fact at the moment.
My post listed four mechanisms for parliament to express it's will. Yesterday a Bill was introduced to the Commons on extension. Then there are opposition day motions.
Kinnock is an idiot. Just because he doesn't think No Deal is a good option for the country doesn't automatically preclude it from being an option on the ballot paper. It is his opinion, not fact. My opinion is he's an idiot - that doesn't make it fact.
Quite how they intend to work their way around the European Parliament elections isn't yet clear. Still looks like a serious headache for both sides save in the case of revocation.
It's entirely clear how they intend to do that, since a plan covering that specific eventuality has already been passed by the Council of Ministers and the European Parliament.
Really? Any idea what the fudge is?
There's no fudge. There's a new calculation for the number of seats per country. If the British are still there come the election, you keep using the old one.
Hmmmm... haven't some of the UK seats already been reallocated to other countries?
Oh well, if they can reverse said reallocation relatively easily then I guess that solves the problem. Won't make us very popular with the countries and candidates done out of the extra seats, but then again I don't imagine we'll be flavour of the month for about the next 20 years even if we do end up staying in.
Some are reallocated in the new allocation, but that hasn't taken effect yet, because Britain is still in the EU. Some countries get a little bit fewer than they'd get of the British hurried up and fucked off, but it's not a big difference - most of the British seats get eliminated rathee than reallocated.
Technically they have only reallocated 27 of the UK's 73 seats and kept the rermaining 46 for future enlargements (e.g. Serbia and Montenegro joining).
France and Spain get an extra 5 each, Italy and the Netherlands get 3, Ireland 2 and the others either get 1 extra or stay the same. Given most countries elect using national or regional party lists it wouldn't be that difficult to revert back to the old numbers even up to election day. Its a bit messier say in Ireland which votes by STV - but they haven't altered their constituency boundaries just added extra seats in 2 of the 3.
So it would be quite easy to revert back and the UK elect its 73 MEPs for as long as is required. One big advantage of the EU not allowing first past the post or AV to be used for their elections!
(Although there are actually a couple of FPTP seats, although they only exist because they are proportion for such a small are they become de facto FPTP...)
Kinnock is an idiot. Just because he doesn't think No Deal is a good option for the country doesn't automatically preclude it from being an option on the ballot paper. It is his opinion, not fact. My opinion is he's an idiot - that doesn't make it fact.
Would his mother and father lose their £140k a year inflation proofed EU pensions if we left without a deal?!!
Stephen is going to get a very generous inheritance thanks to the European taxpayer one day - as the Kinnocks must have a lot of spare cash to save every month! Who can blame him for loving the EU so much.
That is a very interesting question.
And there are two separate answers - one for politicians, and one for Eurocrats. For politicians, if the EU passed a law removing pensions from MEPs from countries that left the EU, they would probably be in the schtuck.
For Eurocrats, the position is a lot more nuanced. You see, almost all British Eurocrats were civil servant who went to Brussels on secondment and then stayed. They will - except for the oldest ones - be covered by UK TUPE legislation, which means that their previous employer continues to bear some responsibility, and if the EU decided not to pay pensions to them, then there would be a case against the UK government in the UK under UK law. I don't know what the decision would be, but TUPE is incredibly and annoyingly strict, so it is certainly more than possible that we would end up paying the bill irrespective. (This is under the assumption, of course, that the EU doesn't simply pay the pensions and then bring a case under international arbitration.)
To avoid no deal the minimum we need to do is to *extend* A50. Requesting an extension is currently a perogative power but as we have seen recently with Humble Addresses, Contempt of Parliament, rejecting draft International Treaties and Government Business motions the Commons are flexing their muscles. The question is whether there is the *will* to extend rather than no deal. If there is the mechanics will be sorted out.
Is the 'we' extending A50 the government, the opposition or a random backbencher?
If only May has the authority to extend/revoke A50 then I do not see how parliament can force the government to bend to its will if it doesn't so wish.
It seems to me that there is an awful lot of hopeful conjecture and supposition dressed as fact at the moment.
Add to that, that the extension of A50 is not the UK’s prerogative, and relies on unanimous approval from the EU27. Also that the EU Parliament is dissolved on 23rd April for the elections, not sitting until 2nd July.
To avoid no deal the minimum we need to do is to *extend* A50. Requesting an extension is currently a perogative power but as we have seen recently with Humble Addresses, Contempt of Parliament, rejecting draft International Treaties and Government Business motions the Commons are flexing their muscles. The question is whether there is the *will* to extend rather than no deal. If there is the mechanics will be sorted out.
Is the 'we' extending A50 the government, the opposition or a random backbencher?
If only May has the authority to extend/revoke A50 then I do not see how parliament can force the government to bend to its will if it doesn't so wish.
It seems to me that there is an awful lot of hopeful conjecture and supposition dressed as fact at the moment.
Add to that, that the extension of A50 is not the UK’s prerogative, and relies on unanimous approval from the EU27. Also that the EU Parliament is dissolved on 23rd April for the elections, not sitting until 2nd July.
It is worth noting, though, that (1) the parliament isn't involved in the extension process, and (2) the EU27 reaches unanimous agreement on 1,000s of things every week. If 26 countries want a two month extension, and there's a single holdout, then there would be enormous pressure brought to bear on them.
I think that getting an extension through to the date of the EP elections would actually be relatively easy. From the point of view of the EC, it's about EUR2bn in revenues for... errr... nothing. Beyond that, it's a lot more complicated. They too want closure.
I think that getting an extension through to the date of the EP elections would actually be relatively easy. From the point of view of the EC, it's about EUR2bn in revenues for... errr... nothing. Beyond that, it's a lot more complicated. They too want closure.
There's something to be said for a long extension without closure. It pushes the cliff edge back without changing the UK's strategic options one bit, and the European elections will provide an opportunity to further deflate the 2016 mandate. Populists in the UK could even do a lot worse than in other major countries.
No, his argument is that she hasn't ENTHUSED any of those groups.
If I wanted to beat Trump, I'd skip the oldies (bye Biden and Sanders). Skip the weirdos (Gabbard, Brooker). And find a proven election winner who can appeal to the people Trump won by accident last time.
Step forward...
Sherrod Brown or John Hickenlooper
But I find the logic for backing Beto or Harris reasonably strong.
I also like Brown and Hickenlooper for that reason, although Brown has a problem with domestic violence allegations.
But you also need a route through the primaries in a very crowded race. I think KLOBUCHAR has one in the form of: Have strong appeal in Iowa, then go the rest of the way on "look how electable I am to Iowans".
I think that getting an extension through to the date of the EP elections would actually be relatively easy. From the point of view of the EC, it's about EUR2bn in revenues for... errr... nothing. Beyond that, it's a lot more complicated. They too want closure.
There's something to be said for a long extension without closure. It pushes the cliff edge back without changing the UK's strategic options one bit, and the European elections will provide an opportunity to further deflate the 2016 mandate. Populists in the UK could even do a lot worse than in other major countries.
It might actually be easier to get a 2-year extension than a 3-month one. At least with 2 years it feels like something might come out differently rather than just being between the same rock and the same hard place a few months down the line, and for a lot of politicians a 2-year can kick would be enough to make it someone else's problem.
I think that getting an extension through to the date of the EP elections would actually be relatively easy. From the point of view of the EC, it's about EUR2bn in revenues for... errr... nothing. Beyond that, it's a lot more complicated. They too want closure.
There's something to be said for a long extension without closure. It pushes the cliff edge back without changing the UK's strategic options one bit, and the European elections will provide an opportunity to further deflate the 2016 mandate. Populists in the UK could even do a lot worse than in other major countries.
The problem with this approach is the European elections would see massive votes for whatever Frangest nukip appears. They won the 2014 elections, with a stab in the back mantra they'd do so again, the Tory vote would collapse.
Comments
1. Theresa May won a vote of no confidence as party leader, amongst Tory MPs, just before Christmas.
2. Tomorrow she's almost certainly going to win a vote of no confidence in her government, in the Commons.
+1 is tiresome internetese.
Avoid.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2018/jun/20/brexit-theresa-may-faces-meaningful-vote-crunch-day-politics-live?page=with:block-5b2a2293e4b02fa070a16245
Some insights do not quite stand the test of time.
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1009344817300635648?s=21
Bravo.
These are testing times, but an idiot is an idiot.
It would very rapidly make a sideshow from a farce if Corbyn kept tabling losing voncs. It will run out of steam soon enough.
Quite how they intend to work their way around the European Parliament elections isn't yet clear. Still looks like a serious headache for both sides save in the case of revocation.
I think that the EU might be prepared to renegotiate as well, but only if (a) it were with the aim of securing an Andrex Soft Brexit, and (b) if there were already evidence from votes in the House of Commons that a firm majority existed for such a solution.
I’m not going to waste any more time thinking about something over which I have no control. See you guys in a month.
Play nice.
It will perhaps help May somewhat but at the end of the day, a temporary bounce won't change the situation she's in, and he can keep calling votes when she's weaker and no deal approaches.
Beyond that, Corbyn is an old Left Eurosceptic. If he can get out of the EU *and* make the Tories carry the can for any and all negative consequences of leaving, I'd've thought that he'd be very happy.
Dunno, he could be right, but my theory is that Democrats of all factions and creeds really, really want to beat Trump.
It is a logical although "if" is doing a lot of work. You disagree with the comments in parentheses but that doesn't make it trolling.
I think it'll more likely than not happen, because some Conservative MPs seem very determined to stop Brexit and find themselves, variously, in positions where they could resume lucrative careers outside Parliament, are at serious risk of deselection or of losing their seats at the next GE regardless, are nearing retirement, or could stand a decent chance of survival by defecting to other parties. But it's far from a done deal.
MPs still seem oblivious to the fact that the EU Withdrawal Act they all voted for is a No Deal Brexit.
Or am I missing something obvious?
Also those aspiring to be Conservative leader will not need to be seen as remainers in any way and certainly not sabotaging leaving the EU cleanly.
- PM, Wilson, opened; LOpp, Thatcher, responded.
9 June 1976
- LOpp, Thatcher, opened; PM, Callaghan, responded.
23 March 1977
- LOpp, Thatcher, opened; PM, Callaghan, responded.
20 July 1977
- PM, Callaghan, opened; LOpp, Thatcher, responded.
14 December 1978
- PM, Callaghan, opened; LOpp, Thatcher, responded.
28 March 1979
- LOpp, Thatcher, opened; PM, Callaghan, responded.
Dates of the Confidence/No Confidence motions during the period of Thatcher of LOTO
Not quite 27 is it???
Indeed not all of them were tabled by Thatcher - the 1978 one was called as a Confidence vote by Callaghan. The March 76 and July 77 votes were on Government adjournment motions.
So that looks like 3 VoNC motions tabled by Thatcher over 4 years.
Source - http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/RP95-19/RP95-19.pdf
They haven't yet expressed a view on the future trade arrangement with the EU because it is currently irrelevant.
https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1085320773072498688
https://twitter.com/SKinnock/status/1085315459916972032
https://twitter.com/IanDunt/status/1085318463646781443
https://twitter.com/stephenkb/status/1085302295611478016
They need a plan, a united front, the numbers in the Commons, and to be willing and able to both vote May out of office and sideline Corbyn if they get in the way. Lots to accomplish, very little time.
Labour has a policy that it would support a permanent customs union. May would never get it past her party.
Oh well, if they can reverse said reallocation relatively easily then I guess that solves the problem. Won't make us very popular with the countries and candidates done out of the extra seats, but then again I don't imagine we'll be flavour of the month for about the next 20 years even if we do end up staying in.
From your list it looks like Harold Wilson called the first of the six, presumably as a valedictorian act before disappearing for reasons unknown.
Note: I assumed the 27 was a tease by Dixie, his point being that Thatcher Milk Snatcher did table several voncs in her time. However, I maintain that Corbo doing so endlessly is unwise.
She is missing the obvious that there is a huge anti No Deal majority in the Commons, and that will usually finds a way,
Now, people saying they can keep putting VONCs down repeatedly.
Maybe they'll do more than one, but in practice it's surely unlikely they'll do several close together as it would all look a bit silly.
France and Spain get an extra 5 each, Italy and the Netherlands get 3, Ireland 2 and the others either get 1 extra or stay the same. Given most countries elect using national or regional party lists it wouldn't be that difficult to revert back to the old numbers even up to election day. Its a bit messier say in Ireland which votes by STV - but they haven't altered their constituency boundaries just added extra seats in 2 of the 3.
So it would be quite easy to revert back and the UK elect its 73 MEPs for as long as is required. One big advantage of the EU not allowing first past the post or AV to be used for their elections!
It'll say nothing more than that - so nothing for anyone but the hardliners to disagree with - and it'll therefore pass.
Both front benches will have to vote for it.
Bercow will actually be doing Govt a favour - because would be hard for Govt to introduce such a Bill - but if someone else does then job is done for them.
Stephen is going to get a very generous inheritance thanks to the European taxpayer one day - as the Kinnocks must have a lot of spare cash to save every month! Who can blame him for loving the EU so much.
If only May has the authority to extend/revoke A50 then I do not see how parliament can force the government to bend to its will if it doesn't so wish.
It seems to me that there is an awful lot of hopeful conjecture and supposition dressed as fact at the moment.
Davies, Chris
Field, Frank
Hart, Simon
Johnson, Dr Caroline
Leigh, Sir Edward
Murrison, Dr Andrew
Parish, Neil
Percy, Andrew
Wood, Mike
If Corbyn declined to accept the challenge he would be shown to be fit.
It is a tactic by May to have pressure put on Corbyn by his party for a second referendum - which Corbyn can see is a trap for Labour.
If we do remain in the EU and participate in the May elections it will interesting to see how many UKIP/ex UKIP party lists will run candidates!
https://order-order.com/2019/01/15/ukip-meps-join-national-front-group-european-parliament/
"........The Leave vote was not more popular among the low skilled, but rather among individuals with intermediate levels of education (A-Levels and GCSE high grades), especially when their socio-economic position was perceived to be declining and/or to be stagnant. These findings point to an alternative narrative to that of the left behind.
This argument of the squeezed middle being behind Brexit raises new questions about how the new politics of inequality influences voting, for it shows that Brexit was the expression of a widely felt social malaise that affects ample segments of the population."
Source
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/brexit-and-the-squeezed-middle/
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/14/us/politics/nato-president-trump.html
If I wanted to beat Trump, I'd skip the oldies (bye Biden and Sanders). Skip the weirdos (Gabbard, Brooker). And find a proven election winner who can appeal to the people Trump won by accident last time.
Step forward...
Sherrod Brown
or
John Hickenlooper
But I find the logic for backing Beto or Harris reasonably strong.
Therefore... therefore...
Chewbacca is not an Ewok.
And there are two separate answers - one for politicians, and one for Eurocrats. For politicians, if the EU passed a law removing pensions from MEPs from countries that left the EU, they would probably be in the schtuck.
For Eurocrats, the position is a lot more nuanced. You see, almost all British Eurocrats were civil servant who went to Brussels on secondment and then stayed. They will - except for the oldest ones - be covered by UK TUPE legislation, which means that their previous employer continues to bear some responsibility, and if the EU decided not to pay pensions to them, then there would be a case against the UK government in the UK under UK law. I don't know what the decision would be, but TUPE is incredibly and annoyingly strict, so it is certainly more than possible that we would end up paying the bill irrespective. (This is under the assumption, of course, that the EU doesn't simply pay the pensions and then bring a case under international arbitration.)
I think that getting an extension through to the date of the EP elections would actually be relatively easy. From the point of view of the EC, it's about EUR2bn in revenues for... errr... nothing. Beyond that, it's a lot more complicated. They too want closure.
But you also need a route through the primaries in a very crowded race. I think KLOBUCHAR has one in the form of: Have strong appeal in Iowa, then go the rest of the way on "look how electable I am to Iowans".
That’s the trouble with absolutists - their “all or nothing” often gets them “nothing”.
It's be sold as a mandate for no deal