I don't agree with Ian Dunt. No Deal Brexit is highly irresponsible in my book. You can commit to avoiding No Deal by implicitly accepting any reasonable alternative.
May's deal IS the reasonable alternative.
Unless your only objective is to remain and not to honour the referendum result.
In which case you roll the dice with No Deal on it.
Just listened to classic fm 4.00pm news that confirmed meetings were continuing with leaders and mps. Tom Brake confirmed he had had a meeting and had said that no deal has to come off the table and a referendum considered. He said further meetings will take place
Then Corbyn banning all his mps from the meetings was confirmed and it was immediately followed by confirmation that Benn and Cooper had been at a meeting, breaking his embargo
Any one listening could only come go the conclusion that Corbyn does not know what he is doing and is scoring an own goal
I hear everyone saying nothing has changed with these meetings but it is a process and until a path through has a common denominator and the amendments on the 29th have been voted on TM is unlikely to pivot away from her position
I do expect no deal will be taken out of the equation at sometime in the next few weeks
I thought it was significant that JRM has said the ERG will support the government in any vonc even if there are problems with their form of brexit
The only way to take No Deal out of the equation is to Extend or Revoke A50. So effectively to cancel the result of the referendum. Under those circumstances I don't see JRM or any other committed leaver continuing to support May.
Or accept the deal
G, I admire your optimism, but flogging a dead horse is not a great idea.
I am optimistic but her deal is the best on offer so put it to a referendum if necessary
I've had a thought, it's a rubbish one, but I'll share it nonetheless.
If we Brexited under 'no deal', or any other deal, I wouldn't actually mind a 2nd referendum say a year or so later to 'join the EU'.
That delivers on the referendum mandate, exposes some of the truth about what the issues will be being outside the EU, and should satisfy Remainers in that they get a chance to stay in.
The EU could choose to what degree they wanted us in, and could draft our possible entry terms accordingly.
Obviously just thinking our loud here, but something as mad as this does solve some issues.
Im reminded of our spat on Cadburys and your total insouciance about job losses and factories shifting to Poland. Suck it up, a price worth paying you told me.
Now suddenly you care about factory workers
funny old world, who'd have thought they get votes too ?
You seem to think that Brexit will slow down rather than accelerate the process. Brexit really was turkeys voting for Christmas, finding the way of making a trend that they hated even worse.
you seem to think people in manufacturing havent been watching industrial hollowing at their expense for ages. Whether it accelerates or not remains to be seen there are arguments both ways. But if the powers that be had maybe paid more attention to keeping their voters in skilled employment we wouldnt be leaving the EU.
Problem is, Brexit is all downside. If businesses have really good reasons to be in the UK they will stay, regardless of Brexit. They may be going anyway, in which case they won't be more likely to go because of Brexit. But at the margins, which is where a lot of these decisions are made, no-one will choose Britain because of Brexit, but they are highly likely to opt for the alternative because of it.
Faith-based Brexit doesn't allow such doubts. Brexit is good and therefore it will be good. It is not Allowed to have downsides, even trivial ones, never mind major ones.
Not at all. The remain pitch was based on telling people with nothing to loset that they would lose something, Its a vote for things might get better versus the certainty that they wont.
The vote was won because the cohort of appalling golf club bores decided that they would do anything to indulge their prejudices and have backfilled their rationales from that, regularly changing them as easily as monkeys swing from branch to branch. The fact that it screws many of those who voted with them is not a matter of any real interest to them.
Forget the no deal blarney. It’s irrelevant virtue signalling. Also forget the noises from Number 10 that nothing has changed: one or more of May’s red lines will have to be crossed.
May has 202 votes. She needs to find whatever variation on the Political Deal that will attract a net 115 votes, and there are 432 votes to win over.
Assume that 100 of those are ERGy unreconcilable Tories, and another 100 are Corbyn ultras who will never vote for a May/Tory deal. That leaves 230 votes to play for so she needs just over half.
My instincts say that:
Norway adds 100 votes - not enough. Customs Union adds 120 votes but also loses 60 votes - not enough. Doesn’t work. People’s Vote adds 120 votes and also loses 50 - not enough.
A combination of two would swing it though? Time to start the MP by MP analysis.
ERG/DUP votes are far easier to peel off - time limit the backstop.
Then you have no deal - The EU won't agree to it.
Passes in the house though - the focal point is then Uk vs Brussels. Progress..
why not just make up a unicorn cake and eat it fairytale agreement without reference to the EU and put that through the house? It would be as much use as your proposal.
I think there's a 99% chance that Plan B will be Plan A but with "demanding a time limit to the backstop".
The rest of the time between now and the 29th March will be May endlessly flying back and forth to Brussels to demand they reopen the withdrawal agreement and the EU finding increasingly pass-agg ways of saying "what part of NO do you not understand you cloth-eared bint?"
Her job would be easier if she had a vote on that which had passed in the house.
Yeah, I thought that after I sent that. The ERG and the DUP don't want May's deal to come back in any form, so I imagine they'll vote against her plan B, whatever it is.
Could be looking at the plan B being just as brutally roundhouse-kicked into a jet engine as plan A.
I don't agree with Ian Dunt. No Deal Brexit is highly irresponsible in my book. You can commit to avoiding No Deal by implicitly accepting any reasonable alternative.
May's deal IS the reasonable alternative.
Unless your only objective is to remain, not to honour the referendum result.
In which case you roll the dice with No Deal on it.
Indeed. Also not leaving on 29th March if you don't have a deal in place by then. Mrs May is keeping No Deal on the table because she refuses to budge from an absolute commitment to leave on that date. So Jeremy Corbyn is right and Theresa May is wrong, even if his tactics are stupid.
How about her deal subject to her deal/remain referendum.
After parliament has vociferously condemned her deal how could they possibly offer it up as an option? And besides, who would go out to the country and bat for it?
The only reasonable options that give all voters a chance to express their will is...Remain, Deal, No Deal on AV.
I don't agree with Ian Dunt. No Deal Brexit is highly irresponsible in my book. You can commit to avoiding No Deal by implicitly accepting any reasonable alternative.
Empty chairing isn't an appropriate response but the message is valid in my view.
Indeed Mr. 43. Of course they can commit to not allowing no deal. It is called revoking A50 the day before it is due if the EU will not agree an extension. It would focus the minds of the headbangers to ensure that they get Brexit in a form that respects the marginal nature of the referendum vote, i.e. a soft Brexit if they are unable to persuade parliament of their "devil-may-care" approach
I've had a thought, it's a rubbish one, but I'll share it nonetheless.
If we Brexited under 'no deal', or any other deal, I wouldn't actually mind a 2nd referendum say a year or so later to 'join the EU'.
That delivers on the referendum mandate, exposes some of the truth about what the issues will be being outside the EU, and should satisfy Remainers in that they get a chance to stay in.
The EU could choose to what degree they wanted us in, and could draft our possible entry terms accordingly.
Obviously just thinking our loud here, but something as mad as this does solve some issues.
I think there's a 99% chance that Plan B will be Plan A but with "demanding a time limit to the backstop".
The rest of the time between now and the 29th March will be May endlessly flying back and forth to Brussels to demand they reopen the withdrawal agreement and the EU finding increasingly pass-agg ways of saying "what part of NO do you not understand you cloth-eared bint?"
Her job would be easier if she had a vote on that which had passed in the house.
Yeah, I thought that after I sent that. The ERG and the DUP don't want May's deal to come back in any form, so I imagine they'll vote against her plan B, whatever it is.
Could be looking at the plan B being just as brutally roundhouse-kicked into a jet engine as plan A.
May should invite one of the less headbangery members of the ERG - or the DUP to propose a solution and put it to a free vote.
Im reminded of our spat on Cadburys and your total insouciance about job losses and factories shifting to Poland. Suck it up, a price worth paying you told me.
Now suddenly you care about factory workers
funny old world, who'd have thought they get votes too ?
You seem to think that Brexit will slow down rather than accelerate the process. Brexit really was turkeys voting for Christmas, finding the way of making a trend that they hated even worse.
you seem to think people in manufacturing havent been watching industrial hollowing at their expense for ages. Whether it accelerates or not remains to be seen there are arguments both ways. But if the powers that be had maybe paid more attention to keeping their voters in skilled employment we wouldnt be leaving the EU.
Subject to the proviso that are still the 7th largest manufacturer in the world, that is true. All Gov’s have relied on services growth and largely ignored manufacturing since the 1970’s and too much of the manufacturing we still have is, with the exception of a few sectors like aerospace and automotive, repetitive components.
We haven’t had anyone in Gov who understands manufacturing sadly otherwise we would have a competitive R&D tax regime, cheaper power, and better training all of which we lack.
Brexit could see what we have left disappear or lead to a big boost if we had a Gov at all interested in import substitution to help address our chronic and persistent trade deficit.
many years ago the political consensus was we wanted a high skill high wage economy. Now its how cheap can we get the labour
How about her deal subject to her deal/remain referendum.
After parliament has vociferously condemned her deal how could they possibly offer it up as an option? And besides, who would go out to the country and bat for it?
The only reasonable options that give all voters a chance to express their will is...Remain, Deal, No Deal on AV.
The EU could choose to what degree they wanted us in, and could draft our possible entry terms accordingly.
Obviously just thinking our loud here, but something as mad as this does solve some issues.
Somebody suggested that we replace the backstop with rejoin. If, at the end of the transition period, we haven't concluded a deal that guarantees no hard border in NI, we simply rejoin the EU.
Im reminded of our spat on Cadburys and your total insouciance about job losses and factories shifting to Poland. Suck it up, a price worth paying you told me.
Now suddenly you care about factory workers
funny old world, who'd have thought they get votes too ?
You seem to think that Brexit will slow down rather than accelerate the process. Brexit really was turkeys voting for Christmas, finding the way of making a trend that they hated even worse.
you seem to think people in manufacturing havent been watching industrial hollowing at their expense for ages. Whether it accelerates or not remains to be seen there are arguments both ways. But if the powers that be had maybe paid more attention to keeping their voters in skilled employment we wouldnt be leaving the EU.
Subject to the proviso that are still the 7th largest manufacturer in the world, that is true. All Gov’s have relied on services growth and largely ignored manufacturing since the 1970’s and too much of the manufacturing we still have is, with the exception of a few sectors like aerospace and automotive, repetitive components.
We haven’t had anyone in Gov who understands manufacturing sadly otherwise we would have a competitive R&D tax regime, cheaper power, and better training all of which we lack.
Brexit could see what we have left disappear or lead to a big boost if we had a Gov at all interested in import substitution to help address our chronic and persistent trade deficit.
many years ago the political consensus was we wanted a high skill high wage economy. Now its how cheap can we get the labour
It might have been an aspiration, but something drastic will have to happen in the schools, where 5 GCSE dumbed down exam "passes" seems to be acceptable.
I think there's a 99% chance that Plan B will be Plan A but with "demanding a time limit to the backstop".
The rest of the time between now and the 29th March will be May endlessly flying back and forth to Brussels to demand they reopen the withdrawal agreement and the EU finding increasingly pass-agg ways of saying "what part of NO do you not understand you cloth-eared bint?"
Her job would be easier if she had a vote on that which had passed in the house.
Yeah, I thought that after I sent that. The ERG and the DUP don't want May's deal to come back in any form, so I imagine they'll vote against her plan B, whatever it is.
Could be looking at the plan B being just as brutally roundhouse-kicked into a jet engine as plan A.
May should invite one of the less headbangery members of the ERG - or the DUP to propose a solution and put it to a free vote.
I don't agree with Ian Dunt. No Deal Brexit is highly irresponsible in my book. You can commit to avoiding No Deal by implicitly accepting any reasonable alternative.
May's deal IS the reasonable alternative.
Unless your only objective is to remain, not to honour the referendum result.
In which case you roll the dice with No Deal on it.
Indeed. Also not leaving on 29th March if you don't have a deal in place by then. Mrs May is keeping No Deal on the table because she refuses to budge from an absolute commitment to leave on that date. So Jeremy Corbyn is right and Theresa May is wrong, even if his tactics are stupid.
I think we're all going round in circles. A commitment not to leave without a Deal is a commitment not to leave. Perhaps that can be achieved by sending an e-mail to Brussels, but I favour the view that it would require fresh legislation. But, either way, it requires Theresa May to completely break with her party, and side with Labour and the Lib Dems.
The EU could choose to what degree they wanted us in, and could draft our possible entry terms accordingly.
Obviously just thinking our loud here, but something as mad as this does solve some issues.
Somebody suggested that we replace the backstop with rejoin. If, at the end of the transition period, we haven't concluded a deal that guarantees no hard border in NI, we simply rejoin the EU.
The DUP could, possibly, get behind that.
And what motivates the EU to negotiate, if that is their preferred outcome?
I think there's a 99% chance that Plan B will be Plan A but with "demanding a time limit to the backstop".
The rest of the time between now and the 29th March will be May endlessly flying back and forth to Brussels to demand they reopen the withdrawal agreement and the EU finding increasingly pass-agg ways of saying "what part of NO do you not understand you cloth-eared bint?"
Her job would be easier if she had a vote on that which had passed in the house.
Yeah, I thought that after I sent that. The ERG and the DUP don't want May's deal to come back in any form, so I imagine they'll vote against her plan B, whatever it is.
Could be looking at the plan B being just as brutally roundhouse-kicked into a jet engine as plan A.
May should invite one of the less headbangery members of the ERG - or the DUP to propose a solution and put it to a free vote.
The ERG members do not have the flexibility to do this. I am not so sure about DUP. Certainly TMay made a very stupid mistake in not involving them in the negotiations with Barnier
Forget the no deal blarney. It’s irrelevant virtue signalling. Also forget the noises from Number 10 that nothing has changed: one or more of May’s red lines will have to be crossed.
May has 202 votes. She needs to find whatever variation on the Political Deal that will attract a net 115 votes, and there are 432 votes to win over.
Assume that 100 of those are ERGy unreconcilable Tories, and another 100 are Corbyn ultras who will never vote for a May/Tory deal. That leaves 230 votes to play for so she needs just over half.
My instincts say that:
Norway adds 100 votes - not enough. Customs Union adds 120 votes but also loses 60 votes - not enough. Doesn’t work. People’s Vote adds 120 votes and also loses 50 - not enough.
A combination of two would swing it though? Time to start the MP by MP analysis.
ERG/DUP votes are far easier to peel off - time limit the backstop.
Then you have no deal - The EU won't agree to it.
Passes in the house though - the focal point is then Uk vs Brussels. Progress..
"Progress" is not the word I would describe such a scenario.
The EU could choose to what degree they wanted us in, and could draft our possible entry terms accordingly.
Obviously just thinking our loud here, but something as mad as this does solve some issues.
Somebody suggested that we replace the backstop with rejoin. If, at the end of the transition period, we haven't concluded a deal that guarantees no hard border in NI, we simply rejoin the EU.
The DUP could, possibly, get behind that.
And what motivates the EU to negotiate, if that is their preferred outcome?
From their perspective it has the same effect as the backstop- to prevent a hard border with NI. Indeed, it is still a backstop. Just not one which separates NI from rUK.
Which means the DUP could support it, but the ERG would have conniptions.
I don't agree with Ian Dunt. No Deal Brexit is highly irresponsible in my book. You can commit to avoiding No Deal by implicitly accepting any reasonable alternative.
May's deal IS the reasonable alternative.
Unless your only objective is to remain, not to honour the referendum result.
In which case you roll the dice with No Deal on it.
Indeed. Also not leaving on 29th March if you don't have a deal in place by then. Mrs May is keeping No Deal on the table because she refuses to budge from an absolute commitment to leave on that date. So Jeremy Corbyn is right and Theresa May is wrong, even if his tactics are stupid.
I think we're all going round in circles. A commitment not to leave without a Deal is a commitment not to leave. Perhaps that can be achieved by sending an e-mail to Brussels, but I favour the view that it would require fresh legislation. But, either way, it requires Theresa May to completely break with her party, and side with Labour and the Lib Dems.
I really don't care. If you can't find a way to Brexit without avoiding No Deal you have seriously fucked up and don't deserve to be anywhere near power.
The EU could choose to what degree they wanted us in, and could draft our possible entry terms accordingly.
Obviously just thinking our loud here, but something as mad as this does solve some issues.
Somebody suggested that we replace the backstop with rejoin. If, at the end of the transition period, we haven't concluded a deal that guarantees no hard border in NI, we simply rejoin the EU.
The DUP could, possibly, get behind that.
And what motivates the EU to negotiate, if that is their preferred outcome?
From their perspective it has the same effect as the backstop- to prevent a hard border with NI. Indeed, it is still a backstop. Just not one which separates NI from rUK.
Which means the DUP could support it, but the ERG would have conniptions.
I doubt this is a goer. It smells like total vassalage, any negotiations against that backdrop would be totally one sided.
Im reminded of our spat on Cadburys and your total insouciance about job losses and factories shifting to Poland. Suck it up, a price worth paying you told me.
Now suddenly you care about factory workers
funny old world, who'd have thought they get votes too ?
You seem to think that Brexit will slow down rather than accelerate the process. Brexit really was turkeys voting for Christmas, finding the way of making a trend that they hated even worse.
you seem to think people in manufacturing havent been watching industrial hollowing at their expense for ages. Whether it accelerates or not remains to be seen there are arguments both ways. But if the powers that be had maybe paid more attention to keeping their voters in skilled employment we wouldnt be leaving the EU.
Problem is, Brexit is all downside. If businesses have really good reasons to be in the UK they will stay, regardless of Brexit. They may be going anyway, in which case they won't be more likely to go because of Brexit. But at the margins, which is where a lot of these decisions are made, no-one will choose Britain because of Brexit, but they are highly likely to opt for the alternative because of it.
Faith-based Brexit doesn't allow such doubts. Brexit is good and therefore it will be good. It is not Allowed to have downsides, even trivial ones, never mind major ones.
Not at all. The remain pitch was based on telling people with nothing to loset that they would lose something, Its a vote for things might get better versus the certainty that they wont.
The vote was won because the cohort of appalling golf club bores decided that they would do anything to indulge their prejudices and have backfilled their rationales from that, regularly changing them as easily as monkeys swing from branch to branch. The fact that it screws many of those who voted with them is not a matter of any real interest to them.
Now youre simply showing your prejudices rather than any understanding of why people voted leave. As an observation let them eat cake tends not to end well.
I really don't care. If you can't find a way to Brexit without avoiding No Deal you have seriously fucked up and don't deserve to be anywhere near power.
I don't agree with Ian Dunt. No Deal Brexit is highly irresponsible in my book. You can commit to avoiding No Deal by implicitly accepting any reasonable alternative.
May's deal IS the reasonable alternative.
Unless your only objective is to remain, not to honour the referendum result.
In which case you roll the dice with No Deal on it.
Indeed. Also not leaving on 29th March if you don't have a deal in place by then. Mrs May is keeping No Deal on the table because she refuses to budge from an absolute commitment to leave on that date. So Jeremy Corbyn is right and Theresa May is wrong, even if his tactics are stupid.
I think we're all going round in circles. A commitment not to leave without a Deal is a commitment not to leave. Perhaps that can be achieved by sending an e-mail to Brussels, but I favour the view that it would require fresh legislation. But, either way, it requires Theresa May to completely break with her party, and side with Labour and the Lib Dems.
Theresa May may believe she is siding with her party, but the evidence of the MV is that the party doesn't agree.
I don't agree with Ian Dunt. No Deal Brexit is highly irresponsible in my book. You can commit to avoiding No Deal by implicitly accepting any reasonable alternative.
May's deal IS the reasonable alternative.
Unless your only objective is to remain, not to honour the referendum result.
In which case you roll the dice with No Deal on it.
Indeed. Also not leaving on 29th March if you don't have a deal in place by then. Mrs May is keeping No Deal on the table because she refuses to budge from an absolute commitment to leave on that date. So Jeremy Corbyn is right and Theresa May is wrong, even if his tactics are stupid.
I think we're all going round in circles. A commitment not to leave without a Deal is a commitment not to leave. Perhaps that can be achieved by sending an e-mail to Brussels, but I favour the view that it would require fresh legislation. But, either way, it requires Theresa May to completely break with her party, and side with Labour and the Lib Dems.
No, I respect your logic, but it would be a commitment to leave when a satisfactory deal has been achieved, and would assume that a deal will be found. Mrs May is finished, so sh eis not obliged to please the ERG, a group that have stabbed her in the back
I don't agree with Ian Dunt. No Deal Brexit is highly irresponsible in my book. You can commit to avoiding No Deal by implicitly accepting any reasonable alternative.
May's deal IS the reasonable alternative.
Unless your only objective is to remain, not to honour the referendum result.
In which case you roll the dice with No Deal on it.
Indeed. Also not leaving on 29th March if you don't have a deal in place by then. Mrs May is keeping No Deal on the table because she refuses to budge from an absolute commitment to leave on that date. So Jeremy Corbyn is right and Theresa May is wrong, even if his tactics are stupid.
I think we're all going round in circles. A commitment not to leave without a Deal is a commitment not to leave. Perhaps that can be achieved by sending an e-mail to Brussels, but I favour the view that it would require fresh legislation. But, either way, it requires Theresa May to completely break with her party, and side with Labour and the Lib Dems.
I really don't care. If you can't find a way to Brexit without avoiding No Deal you have seriously fucked up and don't deserve to be anywhere near power.
A commitment not to leave is your preferred outcome but not mine. I don't think we're going to persuade each other.
Im reminded of our spat on Cadburys and your total insouciance about job losses and factories shifting to Poland. Suck it up, a price worth paying you told me.
Now suddenly you care about factory workers
funny old world, who'd have thought they get votes too ?
You seem to think that Brexit will slow down rather than accelerate the process. Brexit really was turkeys voting for Christmas, finding the way of making a trend that they hated even worse.
you seem to think people in manufacturing havent been watching industrial hollowing at their expense for ages. Whether it accelerates or not remains to be seen there are arguments both ways. But if the powers that be had maybe paid more attention to keeping their voters in skilled employment we wouldnt be leaving the EU.
Subject to the proviso that are still the 7th largest manufacturer in the world, that is true. All Gov’s have relied on services growth and largely ignored manufacturing since the 1970’s and too much of the manufacturing we still have is, with the exception of a few sectors like aerospace and automotive, repetitive components.
We haven’t had anyone in Gov who understands manufacturing sadly otherwise we would have a competitive R&D tax regime, cheaper power, and better training all of which we lack.
Brexit could see what we have left disappear or lead to a big boost if we had a Gov at all interested in import substitution to help address our chronic and persistent trade deficit.
many years ago the political consensus was we wanted a high skill high wage economy. Now its how cheap can we get the labour
The EU could choose to what degree they wanted us in, and could draft our possible entry terms accordingly.
Obviously just thinking our loud here, but something as mad as this does solve some issues.
Somebody suggested that we replace the backstop with rejoin. If, at the end of the transition period, we haven't concluded a deal that guarantees no hard border in NI, we simply rejoin the EU.
The DUP could, possibly, get behind that.
And what motivates the EU to negotiate, if that is their preferred outcome?
From their perspective it has the same effect as the backstop- to prevent a hard border with NI. Indeed, it is still a backstop. Just not one which separates NI from rUK.
Which means the DUP could support it, but the ERG would have conniptions.
I doubt this is a goer. It smells like total vassalage, any negotiations against that backdrop would be totally one sided.
Well, of course. It essentially incentivizes the EU to deliberately waste time to ensure no deal is forthcoming.
This lack of trust on all sides is why the backstop exists.
Just listened to classic fm 4.00pm news that confirmed meetings were continuing with leaders and mps. Tom Brake confirmed he had had a meeting and had said that no deal has to come off the table and a referendum considered. He said further meetings will take place
Then Corbyn banning all his mps from the meetings was confirmed and it was immediately followed by confirmation that Benn and Cooper had been at a meeting, breaking his embargo
Any one listening could only come go the conclusion that Corbyn does not know what he is doing and is scoring an own goal
I hear everyone saying nothing has changed with these meetings but it is a process and until a path through has a common denominator and the amendments on the 29th have been voted on TM is unlikely to pivot away from her position
I do expect no deal will be taken out of the equation at sometime in the next few weeks
I thought it was significant that JRM has said the ERG will support the government in any vonc even if there are problems with their form of brexit
The only way to take No Deal out of the equation is to Extend or Revoke A50. So effectively to cancel the result of the referendum. Under those circumstances I don't see JRM or any other committed leaver continuing to support May.
That’s not really true. It can be done by promising to revoke A50 on 28 March if no deal is reached and no extension has been granted.
Given that the no. 10 line has pivoted towards threatening Brexity types who don’t support the deal with ‘no brexit’ it would just be a formal statement that the threat is real.
No because revoking means staying. Exactly as I said. It removes the last reason for any MP to vote for her deal. And It would bring down her government.
I’m not sure I understand the logic. Threatening to revoke isn’t the same as ending up revoking. Are you suggesting that no MPs would vote for her deal because it’s in any way good for the country, and that the right response to that is to make it a binary choice between that and something even worse?
The logic is that the majority of MPs want to Remain. Remove the threat of No Deal and they will give up even trying to make a deal of any sort work.
The EU could choose to what degree they wanted us in, and could draft our possible entry terms accordingly.
Obviously just thinking our loud here, but something as mad as this does solve some issues.
Somebody suggested that we replace the backstop with rejoin. If, at the end of the transition period, we haven't concluded a deal that guarantees no hard border in NI, we simply rejoin the EU.
The DUP could, possibly, get behind that.
Or easier still, we simply don't "leave" unless and until we do find an agreed solution which guarantees no hard border in NI, rather than simply jumping blindly into the dark and hoping we find something but if we don't then there needs to be an "insurance policy". Even if the WA did pass, and we do "leave" technically on 29th March, we won't in any meaningful sense "leave" until the transition period ends - so I can't see a problem with this. It would also mean we might stay in on current terms, rather than rejoining on terms so prohibitive and penal that rejoining becomes politically untenable anyway...
The EU could choose to what degree they wanted us in, and could draft our possible entry terms accordingly.
Obviously just thinking our loud here, but something as mad as this does solve some issues.
Somebody suggested that we replace the backstop with rejoin. If, at the end of the transition period, we haven't concluded a deal that guarantees no hard border in NI, we simply rejoin the EU.
The DUP could, possibly, get behind that.
Sure - I'm just suggesting replacing rejoin in that plan with a referendum I guess.
Just a random thought - won't be the worst I've ever had
If you can polish it up and make it look worthwhile then be my guest. I'll still want the statue mind!
I don't agree with Ian Dunt. No Deal Brexit is highly irresponsible in my book. You can commit to avoiding No Deal by implicitly accepting any reasonable alternative.
May's deal IS the reasonable alternative.
Unless your only objective is to remain, not to honour the referendum result.
In which case you roll the dice with No Deal on it.
Indeed. Also not leaving on 29th March if you don't have a deal in place by then. Mrs May is keeping No Deal on the table because she refuses to budge from an absolute commitment to leave on that date. So Jeremy Corbyn is right and Theresa May is wrong, even if his tactics are stupid.
I think we're all going round in circles. A commitment not to leave without a Deal is a commitment not to leave. Perhaps that can be achieved by sending an e-mail to Brussels, but I favour the view that it would require fresh legislation. But, either way, it requires Theresa May to completely break with her party, and side with Labour and the Lib Dems.
Theresa May may believe she is siding with her party, but the evidence of the MV is that the party doesn't agree.
Forget the no deal blarney. It’s irrelevant virtue signalling. Also forget the noises from Number 10 that nothing has changed: one or more of May’s red lines will have to be crossed.
May has 202 votes. She needs to find whatever variation on the Political Deal that will attract a net 115 votes, and there are 432 votes to win over.
Assume that 100 of those are ERGy unreconcilable Tories, and another 100 are Corbyn ultras who will never vote for a May/Tory deal. That leaves 230 votes to play for so she needs just over half.
My instincts say that:
Norway adds 100 votes - not enough. Customs Union adds 120 votes but also loses 60 votes - not enough. Doesn’t work. People’s Vote adds 120 votes and also loses 50 - not enough.
A combination of two would swing it though? Time to start the MP by MP analysis.
ERG/DUP votes are far easier to peel off - time limit the backstop.
Then you have no deal - The EU won't agree to it.
Passes in the house though - the focal point is then Uk vs Brussels. Progress..
"Progress" is not the word I would describe such a scenario.
Brexiteers refuse to come to terms with this and refuse to be honest with voters about this, preferring to blame the EU for not giving Britain everything it wants.
Yes, but the Brexiteers are correct - the EU is not giving Britain everything it wants. What the Brexiteers fail to grasp is that NO country or trading is liable to give Britain what it wants.
We are a small country and we are throwing away our influence. That is the lesson of Brexit.
Isn't the lesson that we have been entangled politically into an enterprise over the last 40 years by a series of government without ever explicitly giving our permission - despite other European countries giving their citizens a democratic referendum to give that permission ?
Youare wadting your time with these Remain fanatics. They have absolutely no interest in democracy or anything else as long as they get to stay in their precious union. The really are gollums seduced by the false enticements of their preciouses.
And as someone who I believe voted for UKIP, are you suggesting that had the vote gone the other way, you would have said, "oh I respect that and now I will reach out to my remainer friends and enemies and tell them they were right all along"? No of course not. Democracy is a transient thing and people change their minds, particularly when new information becomes available. To suggest that those of us that don't blindly accept this folly are undemocratic shows the limitation of your thinking, or are you are just being salty because you realise that people are beginning to wake up to how pointless it all is?
Yes. I said on here very clearly before the vote that if we lost I would accept It. I would still have criticised the EU at every opportunity but I was clear I would not campaign to overturn the decision. You see unlike most Remainers I actually believe in democracy.
The EU could choose to what degree they wanted us in, and could draft our possible entry terms accordingly.
Obviously just thinking our loud here, but something as mad as this does solve some issues.
Somebody suggested that we replace the backstop with rejoin. If, at the end of the transition period, we haven't concluded a deal that guarantees no hard border in NI, we simply rejoin the EU.
The hardened alt-Centrists (see Joff Wild, Rottenborough) on here seem to be obsessed with Corbyn being in favour of no Deal, but don't seem to have any evidence for the assertion, in fact all of the evidence in reality is to the contrary. But then reality does have a Corbynite bias.
The EU could choose to what degree they wanted us in, and could draft our possible entry terms accordingly.
Obviously just thinking our loud here, but something as mad as this does solve some issues.
Somebody suggested that we replace the backstop with rejoin. If, at the end of the transition period, we haven't concluded a deal that guarantees no hard border in NI, we simply rejoin the EU.
The DUP could, possibly, get behind that.
Sure - I'm just suggesting replacing rejoin in that plan with a referendum I guess.
Just a random thought - won't be the worst I've ever had
If you can polish it up and make it look worthwhile then be my guest. I'll still want the statue mind!
One of the things that is still slowly permeating through the infinitely dense skulls of leavers, is there is NO circumstance, NONE, that the EU will agree to any deal, any deal at all, that does not contain a legally binding guarantee that a hard border will not happen.
The EU could choose to what degree they wanted us in, and could draft our possible entry terms accordingly.
Obviously just thinking our loud here, but something as mad as this does solve some issues.
Somebody suggested that we replace the backstop with rejoin. If, at the end of the transition period, we haven't concluded a deal that guarantees no hard border in NI, we simply rejoin the EU.
The DUP could, possibly, get behind that.
And the EU just banks the £39bn.
There's the backstop solution - replace it with a financial penalty it the Uk or EU unilaterally departs without a deal.
EU doesn't trust the Uk ? Simply put £20Bn each in escrow until free trade deal done. Either quits they forfeit the cash.
The EU could choose to what degree they wanted us in, and could draft our possible entry terms accordingly.
Obviously just thinking our loud here, but something as mad as this does solve some issues.
Somebody suggested that we replace the backstop with rejoin. If, at the end of the transition period, we haven't concluded a deal that guarantees no hard border in NI, we simply rejoin the EU.
Im reminded of our spat on Cadburys and your total insouciance about job losses and factories shifting to Poland. Suck it up, a price worth paying you told me.
Now suddenly you care about factory workers
funny old world, who'd have thought they get votes too ?
You seem to think that Brexit will slow down rather than accelerate the process. Brexit really was turkeys voting for Christmas, finding the way of making a trend that they hated even worse.
you seem to think people in manufacturing havent been watching industrial hollowing at their expense for ages. Whether it accelerates or not remains to be seen there are arguments both ways. But if the powers that be had maybe paid more attention to keeping their voters in skilled employment we wouldnt be leaving the EU.
Subject to the proviso that are still the 7th largest manufacturer in the world, that is true. All Gov’s have relied on services growth and largely ignored manufacturing since the 1970’s and too much of the manufacturing we still have is, with the exception of a few sectors like aerospace and automotive, repetitive components.
We haven’t had anyone in Gov who understands manufacturing sadly otherwise we would have a competitive R&D tax regime, cheaper power, and better training all of which we lack.
Brexit could see what we have left disappear or lead to a big boost if we had a Gov at all interested in import substitution to help address our chronic and persistent trade deficit.
many years ago the political consensus was we wanted a high skill high wage economy. Now its how cheap can we get the labour
Im reminded of our spat on Cadburys and your total insouciance about job losses and factories shifting to Poland. Suck it up, a price worth paying you told me.
Now suddenly you care about factory workers
funny old world, who'd have thought they get votes too ?
You seem to think that Brexit will slow down rather than accelerate the process. Brexit really was turkeys voting for Christmas, finding the way of making a trend that they hated even worse.
you seem to think people in manufacturing havent been watching industrial hollowing at their expense for ages. Whether it accelerates or not remains to be seen there are arguments both ways. But if the powers that be had maybe paid more attention to keeping their voters in skilled employment we wouldnt be leaving the EU.
Problem is, Brexit is all downside. If businesses have really good reasons to be in the UK they will stay, regardless of Brexit. They may be going anyway, in which case they won't be more likely to go because of Brexit. But at the margins, which is where a lot of these decisions are made, no-one will choose Britain because of Brexit, but they are highly likely to opt for the alternative because of it.
Faith-based Brexit doesn't allow such doubts. Brexit is good and therefore it will be good. It is not Allowed to have downsides, even trivial ones, never mind major ones.
Not at all. The remain pitch was based on telling people with nothing to loset that they would lose something, Its a vote for things might get better versus the certainty that they wont.
The vote was won because the cohort of appalling golf club bores decided that they would do anything to indulge their prejudices and have backfilled their rationales from that, regularly changing them as easily as monkeys swing from branch to branch. The fact that it screws many of those who voted with them is not a matter of any real interest to them.
Now youre simply showing your prejudices rather than any understanding of why people voted leave. As an observation let them eat cake tends not to end well.
The referendum was won in the Tory shires not the hard scrabble wastelands. It was the collective decision of affluent reactionaries to put prejudice ahead of pragmatism that won it.
I don't agree with Ian Dunt. No Deal Brexit is highly irresponsible in my book. You can commit to avoiding No Deal by implicitly accepting any reasonable alternative.
May's deal IS the reasonable alternative.
Unless your only objective is to remain, not to honour the referendum result.
In which case you roll the dice with No Deal on it.
Indeed. Also not leaving on 29th March if you don't have a deal in place by then. Mrs May is keeping No Deal on the table because she refuses to budge from an absolute commitment to leave on that date. So Jeremy Corbyn is right and Theresa May is wrong, even if his tactics are stupid.
I think we're all going round in circles. A commitment not to leave without a Deal is a commitment not to leave. Perhaps that can be achieved by sending an e-mail to Brussels, but I favour the view that it would require fresh legislation. But, either way, it requires Theresa May to completely break with her party, and side with Labour and the Lib Dems.
Theresa May may believe she is siding with her party, but the evidence of the MV is that the party doesn't agree.
To be correct two thirds do agree
Half of those are front benchers who had to agree or resign. In a free vote she would have had closer to 100.
The EU could choose to what degree they wanted us in, and could draft our possible entry terms accordingly.
Obviously just thinking our loud here, but something as mad as this does solve some issues.
Somebody suggested that we replace the backstop with rejoin. If, at the end of the transition period, we haven't concluded a deal that guarantees no hard border in NI, we simply rejoin the EU.
The DUP could, possibly, get behind that.
Sure - I'm just suggesting replacing rejoin in that plan with a referendum I guess.
Just a random thought - won't be the worst I've ever had
If you can polish it up and make it look worthwhile then be my guest. I'll still want the statue mind!
One of the things that is still slowly permeating through the infinitely dense skulls of leavers, is there is NO circumstance, NONE, that the EU will agree to any deal, any deal at all, that does not contain a legally binding guarantee that a hard border will not happen.
You are wrong there.
It is not permeating through to quite a few leavers.
I don't agree with Ian Dunt. No Deal Brexit is highly irresponsible in my book. You can commit to avoiding No Deal by implicitly accepting any reasonable alternative.
May's deal IS the reasonable alternative.
Unless your only objective is to remain, not to honour the referendum result.
In which case you roll the dice with No Deal on it.
Indeed. Also not leaving on 29th March if you don't have a deal in place by then. Mrs May is keeping No Deal on the table because she refuses to budge from an absolute commitment to leave on that date. So Jeremy Corbyn is right and Theresa May is wrong, even if his tactics are stupid.
I think we're all going round in circles. A commitment not to leave without a Deal is a commitment not to leave. Perhaps that can be achieved by sending an e-mail to Brussels, but I favour the view that it would require fresh legislation. But, either way, it requires Theresa May to completely break with her party, and side with Labour and the Lib Dems.
Theresa May may believe she is siding with her party, but the evidence of the MV is that the party doesn't agree.
To be correct two thirds do agree
Take off the payroll vote, two thirds of Tory backbenchers voted against the deal. That's literally the only way she could get people to back her: by making their job depend on it.
And I believe that around 75% of Tory members oppose it too.
The EU could choose to what degree they wanted us in, and could draft our possible entry terms accordingly.
Obviously just thinking our loud here, but something as mad as this does solve some issues.
Somebody suggested that we replace the backstop with rejoin. If, at the end of the transition period, we haven't concluded a deal that guarantees no hard border in NI, we simply rejoin the EU.
The DUP could, possibly, get behind that.
And the EU just banks the £39bn.
But we don't write a cheque on 29th March for £39bn do we, that is just the estimated value of the commitments we would be making on exiting, including annual payments during the transition period.
I don't agree with Ian Dunt. No Deal Brexit is highly irresponsible in my book. You can commit to avoiding No Deal by implicitly accepting any reasonable alternative.
May's deal IS the reasonable alternative.
Unless your only objective is to remain, not to honour the referendum result.
In which case you roll the dice with No Deal on it.
Indeed. Also not leaving on 29th March if you don't have a deal in place by then. Mrs May is keeping No Deal on the table because she refuses to budge from an absolute commitment to leave on that date. So Jeremy Corbyn is right and Theresa May is wrong, even if his tactics are stupid.
I think we're all going round in circles. A commitment not to leave without a Deal is a commitment not to leave. Perhaps that can be achieved by sending an e-mail to Brussels, but I favour the view that it would require fresh legislation. But, either way, it requires Theresa May to completely break with her party, and side with Labour and the Lib Dems.
Theresa May may believe she is siding with her party, but the evidence of the MV is that the party doesn't agree.
To be correct two thirds do agree
Take off the payroll vote, two thirds of Tory backbenchers voted against the deal. That's literally the only way she could get people to back her: by making their job depend on it.
And I believe that around 75% of Tory members oppose it too.
I don't think that's fair. Quite a number of Tory MPs have quit from the government over Brexit, so May has had to appoint MPs to the government who support the deal. The causality acts in the other direction.
Personally I don't think Corbyn and co mind at all if some spatchcocked and further diluted version of May's deal is passed with the assistance of recalcitrant Blairite rebels. The country escapes major upheaval and the Tories and his enemies in the party get the blame for what limited negative economic outcomes and feelings of betrayal from leavers ensue, whilst the Labour Party at large stays above the fray. And the Tory party will still rip itself to shreds.
The hardened alt-Centrists (see Joff Wild, Rottenborough) on here seem to be obsessed with Corbyn being in favour of no Deal, but don't seem to have any evidence for the assertion, in fact all of the evidence in reality is to the contrary. But then reality does have a Corbynite bias.
It would be in his interests for the Tories to do it and take the hit for the consequences. His positioning now can be seen as underlining that, by being seen to resist what the Tories may make happen anyway. However I don't see any evidence that he would want to have his fingers anywhere near supporting it as the outcome.
The EU could choose to what degree they wanted us in, and could draft our possible entry terms accordingly.
Obviously just thinking our loud here, but something as mad as this does solve some issues.
Somebody suggested that we replace the backstop with rejoin. If, at the end of the transition period, we haven't concluded a deal that guarantees no hard border in NI, we simply rejoin the EU.
The DUP could, possibly, get behind that.
Sure - I'm just suggesting replacing rejoin in that plan with a referendum I guess.
Just a random thought - won't be the worst I've ever had
If you can polish it up and make it look worthwhile then be my guest. I'll still want the statue mind!
One of the things that is still slowly permeating through the infinitely dense skulls of leavers, is there is NO circumstance, NONE, that the EU will agree to any deal, any deal at all, that does not contain a legally binding guarantee that a hard border will not happen.
You are wrong there.
It is not permeating through to quite a few leavers.
Very slowly. They'll figure it out by 2023 if they're not dead.
I don't agree with Ian Dunt. No Deal Brexit is highly irresponsible in my book. You can commit to avoiding No Deal by implicitly accepting any reasonable alternative.
May's deal IS the reasonable alternative.
Unless your only objective is to remain, not to honour the referendum result.
In which case you roll the dice with No Deal on it.
Indeed. Also not leaving on 29th March if you don't have a deal in place by then. Mrs May is keeping No Deal on the table because she refuses to budge from an absolute commitment to leave on that date. So Jeremy Corbyn is right and Theresa May is wrong, even if his tactics are stupid.
I think we're all going round in circles. A commitment not to leave without a Deal is a commitment not to leave. Perhaps that can be achieved by sending an e-mail to Brussels, but I favour the view that it would require fresh legislation. But, either way, it requires Theresa May to completely break with her party, and side with Labour and the Lib Dems.
Theresa May may believe she is siding with her party, but the evidence of the MV is that the party doesn't agree.
To be correct two thirds do agree
Take off the payroll vote, two thirds of Tory backbenchers voted against the deal. That's literally the only way she could get people to back her: by making their job depend on it.
And I believe that around 75% of Tory members oppose it too.
Two thirds voted with TM and the membership is very ukip and do not represent me, and of course most conservative voters
Im reminded of our spat on Cadburys and your total insouciance about job losses and factories shifting to Poland. Suck it up, a price worth paying you told me.
Now suddenly you care about factory workers
funny old world, who'd have thought they get votes too ?
You seem to think that Brexit will slow down rather than accelerate the process. Brexit really was turkeys voting for Christmas, finding the way of making a trend that they hated even worse.
you seem to think people in manufacturing havent been watching industrial hollowing at their expense for ages. Whether it accelerates or not remains to be seen there are arguments both ways. But if the powers that be had maybe paid more attention to keeping their voters in skilled employment we wouldnt be leaving the EU.
Problem is, Brexit is all downside. If businesses have really good reasons to be in the UK they will stay, regardless of Brexit. They may be going anyway, in which case they won't be more likely to go because of Brexit. But at the margins, which is where a lot of these decisions are made, no-one will choose Britain because of Brexit, but they are highly likely to opt for the alternative because of it.
Faith-based Brexit doesn't allow such doubts. Brexit is good and therefore it will be good. It is not Allowed to have downsides, even trivial ones, never mind major ones.
Not at all. The remain pitch was based on telling people with nothing to loset that they would lose something, Its a vote for things might get better versus the certainty that they wont.
What a gloomy outlook you have on the world. I am not surprised you voted for the country to go backwards
The world is wonderful. The political edifice called the EU is shit. Backward looking, shrinking and doomed to irrelevance. It is your vision that is the gloomy one.
Im reminded of our spat on Cadburys and your total insouciance about job losses and factories shifting to Poland. Suck it up, a price worth paying you told me.
Now suddenly you care about factory workers
funny old world, who'd have thought they get votes too ?
You seem to think that Brexit will slow down rather than accelerate the process. Brexit really was turkeys voting for Christmas, finding the way of making a trend that they hated even worse.
you seem to think people in manufacturing havent been watching industrial hollowing at their expense for ages. Whether it accelerates or not remains to be seen there are arguments both ways. But if the powers that be had maybe paid more attention to keeping their voters in skilled employment we wouldnt be leaving the EU.
Problem is, Brexit is all downside. If businesses have really good reasons to be in the UK they will stay, regardless of Brexit. They may be going anyway, in which case they won't be more likely to go because of Brexit. But at the margins, which is where a lot of these decisions are made, no-one will choose Britain because of Brexit, but they are highly likely to opt for the alternative because of it.
Faith-based Brexit doesn't allow such doubts. Brexit is good and therefore it will be good. It is not Allowed to have downsides, even trivial ones, never mind major ones.
Not at all. The remain pitch was based on telling people with nothing to loset that they would lose something, Its a vote for things might get better versus the certainty that they wont.
The vote was won because the cohort of appalling golf club bores decided that they would do anything to indulge their prejudices and have backfilled their rationales from that, regularly changing them as easily as monkeys swing from branch to branch. The fact that it screws many of those who voted with them is not a matter of any real interest to them.
Now youre simply showing your prejudices rather than any understanding of why people voted leave. As an observation let them eat cake tends not to end well.
The referendum was won in the Tory shires not the hard scrabble wastelands. It was the collective decision of affluent reactionaries to put prejudice ahead of pragmatism that won it.
I don't agree with Ian Dunt. No Deal Brexit is highly irresponsible in my book. You can commit to avoiding No Deal by implicitly accepting any reasonable alternative.
May's deal IS the reasonable alternative.
Unless your only objective is to remain, not to honour the referendum result.
In which case you roll the dice with No Deal on it.
Indeed. Also not leaving on 29th March if you don't have a deal in place by then. Mrs May is keeping No Deal on the table because she refuses to budge from an absolute commitment to leave on that date. So Jeremy Corbyn is right and Theresa May is wrong, even if his tactics are stupid.
I think we're all going round in circles. A commitment not to leave without a Deal is a commitment not to leave. Perhaps that can be achieved by sending an e-mail to Brussels, but I favour the view that it would require fresh legislation. But, either way, it requires Theresa May to completely break with her party, and side with Labour and the Lib Dems.
Theresa May may believe she is siding with her party, but the evidence of the MV is that the party doesn't agree.
To be correct two thirds do agree
Take off the payroll vote, two thirds of Tory backbenchers voted against the deal. That's literally the only way she could get people to back her: by making their job depend on it.
And I believe that around 75% of Tory members oppose it too.
I don't think that's fair. Quite a number of Tory MPs have quit from the government over Brexit, so May has had to appoint MPs to the government who support the deal. The causality acts in the other direction.
To be honest , fairness is not part of grabcocque dna
Im reminded of our spat on Cadburys and your total insouciance about job losses and factories shifting to Poland. Suck it up, a price worth paying you told me.
Now suddenly you care about factory workers
funny old world, who'd have thought they get votes too ?
You seem to think that Brexit will slow down rather than accelerate the process. Brexit really was turkeys voting for Christmas, finding the way of making a trend that they hated even worse.
you seem to think people in manufacturing havent been watching industrial hollowing at their expense for ages. Whether it accelerates or not remains to be seen there are arguments both ways. But if the powers that be had maybe paid more attention to keeping their voters in skilled employment we wouldnt be leaving the EU.
Problem is, Brexit is all downside. If businesses have really good reasons to be in the UK they will stay, regardless of Brexit. They may be going anyway, in which case they won't be more likely to go because of Brexit. But at the margins, which is where a lot of these decisions are made, no-one will choose Britain because of Brexit, but they are highly likely to opt for the alternative because of it.
Faith-based Brexit doesn't allow such doubts. Brexit is good and therefore it will be good. It is not Allowed to have downsides, even trivial ones, never mind major ones.
Not at all. The remain pitch was based on telling people with nothing to loset that they would lose something, Its a vote for things might get better versus the certainty that they wont.
The vote was won because the cohort of appalling golf club real interest to them.
Now youre simply showing your prejudices rather than any understanding of why people voted leave. As an observation let them eat cake tends not to end well.
The referendum was won in the Tory shires not the hard scrabble wastelands. It was the collective decision of affluent reactionaries to put prejudice ahead of pragmatism that won it.
Look around you: pb is full of them.
Now youre just off on one, Places like Stoke, Redcar, Nuneaton, the Welsh valleys are not natural golf club country. There was a surprising consensus across the social spectrum in my area on why they were voting.
The hardened alt-Centrists (see Joff Wild, Rottenborough) on here seem to be obsessed with Corbyn being in favour of no Deal, but don't seem to have any evidence for the assertion, in fact all of the evidence in reality is to the contrary. But then reality does have a Corbynite bias.
I don't agree with Ian Dunt. No Deal Brexit is highly irresponsible in my book. You can commit to avoiding No Deal by implicitly accepting any reasonable alternative.
May's deal IS the reasonable alternative.
Unless your only objective is to remain, not to honour the referendum result.
In which case you roll the dice with No Deal on it.
Indeed. Also not leaving on 29th March if you don't have a deal in place by then. Mrs May is keeping No Deal on the table because she refuses to budge from an absolute commitment to leave on that date. So Jeremy Corbyn is right and Theresa May is wrong, even if his tactics are stupid.
I think we're all going round in circles. A commitment not to leave without a Deal is a commitment not to leave. Perhaps that can be achieved by sending an e-mail to Brussels, but I favour the view that it would require fresh legislation. But, either way, it requires Theresa May to completely break with her party, and side with Labour and the Lib Dems.
Theresa May may believe she is siding with her party, but the evidence of the MV is that the party doesn't agree.
To be correct two thirds do agree
Take off the payroll vote, two thirds of Tory backbenchers voted against the deal. That's literally the only way she could get people to back her: by making their job depend on it.
And I believe that around 75% of Tory members oppose it too.
I don't think that's fair. Quite a number of Tory MPs have quit from the government over Brexit, so May has had to appoint MPs to the government who support the deal. The causality acts in the other direction.
To be honest , fairness is not part of grabcocque dna
I don't agree with Ian Dunt. No Deal Brexit is highly irresponsible in my book. You can commit to avoiding No Deal by implicitly accepting any reasonable alternative.
May's deal IS the reasonable alternative.
Unless your only objective is to remain, not to honour the referendum result.
In which case you roll the dice with No Deal on it.
Indeed. Also not leaving on 29th March if you don't have a deal in place by then. Mrs May is keeping No Deal on the table because she refuses to budge from an absolute commitment to leave on that date. So Jeremy Corbyn is right and Theresa May is wrong, even if his tactics are stupid.
I think we're all going round in circles. A commitment not to leave without a Deal is a commitment not to leave. Perhaps that can be achieved by sending an e-mail to Brussels, but I favour the view that it would require fresh legislation. But, either way, it requires Theresa May to completely break with her party, and side with Labour and the Lib Dems.
Theresa May may believe she is siding with her party, but the evidence of the MV is that the party doesn't agree.
To be correct two thirds do agree
Half of those are front benchers who had to agree or resign. In a free vote she would have had closer to 100.
The world is wonderful. The political edifice called the EU is shit. Backward looking, shrinking and doomed to irrelevance. It is your vision that is the gloomy one.
Me, a gloomy dimwit pessimist: "The EU is imperfect but the freedom to live, work and love anywhere in a united and peaceful Europe is a dream that millions fought for."
You, a brexiteer intellectual optimist: "EVERYTHING IN EUROPE IS SHIT AND DOOMED"
I don't agree with Ian Dunt. No Deal Brexit is highly irresponsible in my book. You can commit to avoiding No Deal by implicitly accepting any reasonable alternative.
May's deal IS the reasonable alternative.
Unless your only objective is to remain, not to honour the referendum result.
In which case you roll the dice with No Deal on it.
Indeed. Also not leaving on 29th March if you don't have a deal in place by then. Mrs May is keeping No Deal on the table because she refuses to budge from an absolute commitment to leave on that date. So Jeremy Corbyn is right and Theresa May is wrong, even if his tactics are stupid.
I think we're all going round in circles. A commitment not to leave without a Deal is a commitment not to leave. Perhaps that can be achieved by sending an e-mail to Brussels, but I favour the view that it would require fresh legislation. But, either way, it requires Theresa May to completely break with her party, and side with Labour and the Lib Dems.
Theresa May may believe she is siding with her party, but the evidence of the MV is that the party doesn't agree.
To be correct two thirds do agree
Take off the payroll vote, two thirds of Tory backbenchers voted against the deal. That's literally the only way she could get people to back her: by making their job depend on it.
And I believe that around 75% of Tory members oppose it too.
I don't think that's fair. Quite a number of Tory MPs have quit from the government over Brexit, so May has had to appoint MPs to the government who support the deal. The causality acts in the other direction.
To be honest , fairness is not part of grabcocque dna
The EU could choose to what degree they wanted us in, and could draft our possible entry terms accordingly.
Obviously just thinking our loud here, but something as mad as this does solve some issues.
Somebody suggested that we replace the backstop with rejoin. If, at the end of the transition period, we haven't concluded a deal that guarantees no hard border in NI, we simply rejoin the EU.
The DUP could, possibly, get behind that.
Sure - I'm just suggesting replacing rejoin in that plan with a referendum I guess.
Just a random thought - won't be the worst I've ever had
If you can polish it up and make it look worthwhile then be my guest. I'll still want the statue mind!
One of the things that is still slowly permeating through the infinitely dense skulls of leavers, is there is NO circumstance, NONE, that the EU will agree to any deal, any deal at all, that does not contain a legally binding guarantee that a hard border will not happen.
In realistic terms you're right. It suits them too. Post Brexit an offer of a good cigar and a meal will have them dropping Irish interests on a whim though.
Whilst NI and Ireland continue to be different countries the guarantee of no hard border cannot be a guarantee. It's just a stupid clause in an agreement that all sides really like as its stopped a lot of far more stupid stuff.
The only plausible way for May to get her Deal or anything like it through the HoC is for there to be mass Labour abstensions.
She is totally incapable of reaching out to them in any sort of way that would provoke that. She lacks the imagination, the guile, the ingenuity, the political nous.
Therefore we will edge ever closer to a No Deal cliff until something cracks. I suspect that crack will be when hard-line anti-No Deal Tories, can stand it no more and eventually find a way to force an A50 revocation or extension.
In realistic terms you're right. It suits them too. Post Brexit an offer of a good cigar and a meal will have them dropping Irish interests on a whim though.
Whilst NI and Ireland continue to be different countries the guarantee of no hard border cannot be a guarantee. It's just a stupid clause in an agreement that all sides really like as its stopped a lot of far more stupid stuff.
As Marting Selmayr has made clear several times, if the UK leaves, the EU will have its pound of flesh. And that will be Northern Ireland.
I don't agree with Ian Dunt. No Deal Brexit is highly irresponsible in my book. You can commit to avoiding No Deal by implicitly accepting any reasonable alternative.
May's deal IS the reasonable alternative.
Unless your only objective is to remain, not to honour the referendum result.
In which case you roll the dice with No Deal on it.
Indeed. Also not leaving on 29th March if you don't have a deal in place by then. Mrs May is keeping No Deal on the table because she refuses to budge from an absolute commitment to leave on that date. So Jeremy Corbyn is right and Theresa May is wrong, even if his tactics are stupid.
I think we're all going round in circles. A commitment not to leave without a Deal is a commitment not to leave. Perhaps that can be achieved by sending an e-mail to Brussels, but I favour the view that it would require fresh legislation. But, either way, it requires Theresa May to completely break with her party, and side with Labour and the Lib Dems.
I really don't care. If you can't find a way to Brexit without avoiding No Deal you have seriously fucked up and don't deserve to be anywhere near power.
A commitment not to leave is your preferred outcome but not mine. I don't think we're going to persuade each other.
I didn't say that. I said a commitment to avoid leaving on 29th March without a deal. This implies any reasonable alternative including extension of A50 if the EU agrees, accepting May's deal, accepting a variation on May's Deal with for example permanent customs union, revoking Article 50. There's a discussion to be had and people may prefer one alternative to another. It may not be my preferred alternative. But No Deal is simply irresponsible.
Me, a gloomy dimwit pessimist: "The EU is imperfect but the freedom to live, work and love anywhere in a united and peaceful Europe is a dream that millions fought for."
Good grief, you know you're on the right side of the argument when the opposition is claiming WW2 was about the EU and its Freedom of Movement rules.
One of, if not the, stupidest things i've ever read on here.
In realistic terms you're right. It suits them too. Post Brexit an offer of a good cigar and a meal will have them dropping Irish interests on a whim though.
Whilst NI and Ireland continue to be different countries the guarantee of no hard border cannot be a guarantee. It's just a stupid clause in an agreement that all sides really like as its stopped a lot of far more stupid stuff.
As Marting Selmayr has made clear several times, if the UK leaves, the EU will have its pound of flesh. And that will be Northern Ireland.
They'll probably end up with Scotland and maybe, in time, Wales too, tbf.
You seem to think that Brexit will slow down rather than accelerate the process. Brexit really was turkeys voting for Christmas, finding the way of making a trend that they hated even worse.
you seem to think people in manufacturing havent been watching industrial hollowing at their expense for ages. Whether it accelerates or not remains to be seen there are arguments both ways. But if the powers that be had maybe paid more attention to keeping their voters in skilled employment we wouldnt be leaving the EU.
Problem is, Brexit is all downside. If businesses have really good reasons to be in the UK they will stay, regardless of Brexit. They may be going anyway, in which case they won't be more likely to go because of Brexit. But at the margins, which is where a lot of these decisions are made, no-one will choose Britain because of Brexit, but they are highly likely to opt for the alternative because of it.
Faith-based Brexit doesn't allow such doubts. Brexit is good and therefore it will be good. It is not Allowed to have downsides, even trivial ones, never mind major ones.
Not at all. The remain pitch was based on telling people with nothing to loset that they would lose something, Its a vote for things might get better versus the certainty that they wont.
The vote was won because the cohort of appalling golf club real interest to them.
Now youre simply showing your prejudices rather than any understanding of why people voted leave. As an observation let them eat cake tends not to end well.
The referendum was won in the Tory shires not the hard scrabble wastelands. It was the collective decision of affluent reactionaries to put prejudice ahead of pragmatism that won it.
Look around you: pb is full of them.
Now youre just off on one, Places like Stoke, Redcar, Nuneaton, the Welsh valleys are not natural golf club country. There was a surprising consensus across the social spectrum in my area on why they were voting.
There you go again, using the poor as human shields. Look at the Leave vote in the Tory shires. Their decision to put shrivelled hearts over heads was the key difference and provided what passes for the intellectual leadership of the whole campaign.
The hardened alt-Centrists...on here seem to be obsessed with Corbyn being in favour of no Deal, but don't seem to have any evidence for the assertion...
Im reminded of our spat on Cadburys and your total insouciance about job losses and factories shifting to Poland. Suck it up, a price worth paying you told me.
Now suddenly you care about factory workers
funny old world, who'd have thought they get votes too ?
You seem to think that Brexit will slow down rather than accelerate the process. Brexit really was turkeys voting for Christmas, finding the way of making a trend that they hated even worse.
you seem to think people in manufacturing havent been watching industrial hollowing at their expense for ages. Whether it accelerates or not remains to be seen there are arguments both ways. But if the powers that be had maybe paid more attention to keeping their voters in skilled employment we wouldnt be leaving the EU.
Subject to the proviso that are still the 7th largest manufacturer in the world, that is true. All Gov’s have relied on services growth and largely ignored manufacturing since the 1970’s and too much of the manufacturing we still have is, with the exception of a few sectors like aerospace and automotive, repetitive components.
We haven’t had anyone in Gov who understands manufacturing sadly otherwise we would have a competitive R&D tax regime, cheaper power, and better training all of which we lack.
Brexit could see what we have left disappear or lead to a big boost if we had a Gov at all interested in import substitution to help address our chronic and persistent trade deficit.
many years ago the political consensus was we wanted a high skill high wage economy. Now its how cheap can we get the labour
There you go again, using the poor as human shields. .
Absolutely Meeks.
Protect the financial interests of the poor by joining with Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, multi-nationals, billionaire financiers etc in fighting Brexit.
In realistic terms you're right. It suits them too. Post Brexit an offer of a good cigar and a meal will have them dropping Irish interests on a whim though.
Whilst NI and Ireland continue to be different countries the guarantee of no hard border cannot be a guarantee. It's just a stupid clause in an agreement that all sides really like as its stopped a lot of far more stupid stuff.
As Marting Selmayr has made clear several times, if the UK leaves, the EU will have its pound of flesh. And that will be Northern Ireland.
As suggested - replace NI / the backstop with a one time quantum amount in £ and a deal could pass the ERG and DUP.
That's the normal remedy for breaking a deal - damages in £.
In realistic terms you're right. It suits them too. Post Brexit an offer of a good cigar and a meal will have them dropping Irish interests on a whim though.
Whilst NI and Ireland continue to be different countries the guarantee of no hard border cannot be a guarantee. It's just a stupid clause in an agreement that all sides really like as its stopped a lot of far more stupid stuff.
As Marting Selmayr has made clear several times, if the UK leaves, the EU will have its pound of flesh. And that will be Northern Ireland.
As suggested - replace NI / the backstop with a one time quantum amount in £ and a deal could pass the ERG and DUP.
That's the normal remedy for breaking a deal - damages in £.
No deal will ever pass the hard core ERG, unless it's No Deal.
The only plausible way for May to get her Deal or anything like it through the HoC is for there to be mass Labour abstensions.
She is totally incapable of reaching out to them in any sort of way that would provoke that. She lacks the imagination, the guile, the ingenuity, the political nous.
Therefore we will edge ever closer to a No Deal cliff until something cracks. I suspect that crack will be when hard-line anti-No Deal Tories, can stand it no more and eventually find a way to force an A50 revocation or extension.
Its difficult to get any agreement with someone like Corbyn. That's why he must never become PM.. He wants a Marxist state where we all are forced to ear mealy meal.
In realistic terms you're right. It suits them too. Post Brexit an offer of a good cigar and a meal will have them dropping Irish interests on a whim though.
Whilst NI and Ireland continue to be different countries the guarantee of no hard border cannot be a guarantee. It's just a stupid clause in an agreement that all sides really like as its stopped a lot of far more stupid stuff.
As Marting Selmayr has made clear several times, if the UK leaves, the EU will have its pound of flesh. And that will be Northern Ireland.
Yeah - sort of odd that the DUP are being a bit awkward (I think quite fairly so - they're toeing a really fine line very well), but ought to be rejoicing in just how far we are prepared to struggle over their interests.
Me, a gloomy dimwit pessimist: "The EU is imperfect but the freedom to live, work and love anywhere in a united and peaceful Europe is a dream that millions fought for."
Good grief, you know you're on the right side of the argument when the opposition is claiming WW2 was about the EU and its Freedom of Movement rules.
One of, if not the, stupidest things i've ever read on here.
Yes, you're right. I now realise what a FUCKING RETARD I've been for suggesting that the primary impetus behind european integration was healing the scars of a century of brutal war and bringing peace and prosperity to Europe.
Gosh I do wish I had your towering intellect Mr Jim, but as a mere simpleton I now realise how foolish I've been in suggesting that using institutions to bring liberty or peace were in any way at the forefront of the minds of the post-war reconstruction era politicians.
In fact, it's only now that I've realised the true depths of my awesome lack of intellect for somehow thinking that the european project, starting as it did after two of the bloodiest conflicts in human history, was in ANY WAY a response to try to prevent them from happening again.
What a truly pitiful thickie dim muddlebum I am.
Please forgive me, I feel awful for sullying your vast intellect with my wretched dumbness.
On the issue of a second referendum, most people want the 2016 Referendum to be respected (53%), compared with three in ten (29%) who disagree and one in five (18%) who don’t know.
You seem to think that Brexit will slow down rather than accelerate the process. Brexit really was turkeys voting for Christmas, finding the way of making a trend that they hated even worse.
you seem to think people in manufacturing havent been watching industrial hollowing at their expense for ages. Whether it accelerates or not remains to be seen there are arguments both ways. But if the powers that be had maybe paid more attention to keeping their voters in skilled employment we wouldnt be leaving the EU.
Problem is, Brexit is ale of it.
Faith-based Brexit doesn't allow such doubts. Brexit is good and therefore it will be good. It is not Allowed to have downsides, even trivial ones, never mind major ones.
Not at all. The remain pitch was based on telling people with nothing to loset that they would lose something, Its a vote for things might get better versus the certainty that they wont.
The vote was won because the cohort of appalling golf club real interest to them.
Now youre simply showing your prejudices rather than any understanding of why people voted leave. As an observation let them eat cake tends not to end well.
The referendum was won in the Tory shires not the hard scrabble wastelands. It was the collective decision of affluent reactionaries to put prejudice ahead of pragmatism that won it.
Look around you: pb is full of them.
Now youre just off on one, Places like Stoke, Redcar, Nuneaton, the Welsh valleys are not natural golf club country. There was a surprising consensus across the social spectrum in my area on why they were voting.
There you go again, using the poor as human shields. Look at the Leave vote in the Tory shires. Their decision to put shrivelled hearts over heads was the key difference and provided what passes for the intellectual leadership of the whole campaign.
Now youve just gone daft. ABC1 voted majority remain C2DE leave. Those are just the facts and frankly voters are in a much better position to decide what works for them than distant people in London.
In realistic terms you're right. It suits them too. Post Brexit an offer of a good cigar and a meal will have them dropping Irish interests on a whim though.
Whilst NI and Ireland continue to be different countries the guarantee of no hard border cannot be a guarantee. It's just a stupid clause in an agreement that all sides really like as its stopped a lot of far more stupid stuff.
As Marting Selmayr has made clear several times, if the UK leaves, the EU will have its pound of flesh. And that will be Northern Ireland.
That approach just makes No Deal more likely. That might suit Selmayr now but when the EU loses the U.K. budget contributions, the £ 39bn isn’t paid and the Irish come begging for their € 300 bn because they lose free access to the UK market, that attitude might change.
There you go again, using the poor as human shields. .
Absolutely Meeks.
Protect the financial interests of the poor by joining with Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, multi-nationals, billionaire financiers etc in fighting Brexit.
Since this started with a link to a manufacturer closing a plant in Britain because of Brexit, truly up is down in your mind. Just another reactionary Brexiteer backfilling a rationale to indulge your prejudices.
Now youre just off on one, Places like Stoke, Redcar, Nuneaton, the Welsh valleys are not natural golf club country. There was a surprising consensus across the social spectrum in my area on why they were voting.
Drive down Lutterworth Road into Nuneaton and natural golf club country is exactly what it looks like.
Comments
Unless your only objective is to remain and not to honour the referendum result.
In which case you roll the dice with No Deal on it.
Yes she might win that one.
If we Brexited under 'no deal', or any other deal, I wouldn't actually mind a 2nd referendum say a year or so later to 'join the EU'.
That delivers on the referendum mandate, exposes some of the truth about what the issues will be being outside the EU, and should satisfy Remainers in that they get a chance to stay in.
The EU could choose to what degree they wanted us in, and could draft our possible entry terms accordingly.
Obviously just thinking our loud here, but something as mad as this does solve some issues.
Could be looking at the plan B being just as brutally roundhouse-kicked into a jet engine as plan A.
After parliament has vociferously condemned her deal how could they possibly offer it up as an option? And besides, who would go out to the country and bat for it?
The only reasonable options that give all voters a chance to express their will is...Remain, Deal, No Deal on AV.
Or, at a push...
Revoke/Don't Revoke
The DUP could, possibly, get behind that.
Which means the DUP could support it, but the ERG would have conniptions.
It smells like total vassalage, any negotiations against that backdrop would be totally one sided.
Prince Philip involved in a RTA . Not injured
Car T boned and turned over
This lack of trust on all sides is why the backstop exists.
The counter argument is that we are leaving it to some last minute hasty wheeling and dealing to make the decision on what Brexit means.
A People’s Vote is NOT a cancellation. It is a democratic exercise to validate whatever Parliament is able to come up with before March.
Just a random thought - won't be the worst I've ever had
If you can polish it up and make it look worthwhile then be my guest. I'll still want the statue mind!
At the moment that is looking like Deal vs No Deal.
Which honours the referendum result so we can all get behind that i'm sure.
EU doesn't trust the Uk ? Simply put £20Bn each in escrow until free trade deal done. Either quits they forfeit the cash.
I've been surprised for a while to see pics of him behind the wheel of some massive 4x4 at his advanced years.
Look around you: pb is full of them.
It is not permeating through to quite a few leavers.
And I believe that around 75% of Tory members oppose it too.
Corbyn: “Take no deal off the table”
Theresa May: “No I meant the other sort of national interest”
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-46911265
Well.
Its a view, I guess.
You, a brexiteer intellectual optimist: "EVERYTHING IN EUROPE IS SHIT AND DOOMED"
Whilst NI and Ireland continue to be different countries the guarantee of no hard border cannot be a guarantee. It's just a stupid clause in an agreement that all sides really like as its stopped a lot of far more stupid stuff.
She is totally incapable of reaching out to them in any sort of way that would provoke that. She lacks the imagination, the guile, the ingenuity, the political nous.
Therefore we will edge ever closer to a No Deal cliff until something cracks. I suspect that crack will be when hard-line anti-No Deal Tories, can stand it no more and eventually find a way to force an A50 revocation or extension.
Oxford has suspended its deal with Huawei would be more correct.
One of, if not the, stupidest things i've ever read on here.
B: everything he does
Protect the financial interests of the poor by joining with Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, multi-nationals, billionaire financiers etc in fighting Brexit.
That's the normal remedy for breaking a deal - damages in £.
However you might like to slag her off, I would rather have T May leading negotiations rather than anyone else of the current crop of politicians.
Having a second referendum before the first is implemented is not particularly democratic.
Gosh I do wish I had your towering intellect Mr Jim, but as a mere simpleton I now realise how foolish I've been in suggesting that using institutions to bring liberty or peace were in any way at the forefront of the minds of the post-war reconstruction era politicians.
In fact, it's only now that I've realised the true depths of my awesome lack of intellect for somehow thinking that the european project, starting as it did after two of the bloodiest conflicts in human history, was in ANY WAY a response to try to prevent them from happening again.
What a truly pitiful thickie dim muddlebum I am.
Please forgive me, I feel awful for sullying your vast intellect with my wretched dumbness.
On the issue of a second referendum, most people want the 2016 Referendum to be respected (53%), compared with three in ten (29%) who disagree and one in five (18%) who don’t know.
Anyways pub.
have a good evening.