One point which needs to be re-emphasised, as it seems to be getting a bit lost: if the deal is not approved today, then it follows, as night follows day, that we are leaving the EU in exactly two weeks time, in chaos and without any transition, unless parliament agrees something else which the government and the EU accept. (If that something is 'Revoke' then the EU's acceptance is not required).
Given that MPs are still faffing about discussing how many of their favourite unicorns can fit on a pin-head, and the fact that two weeks is not exactly ample time, the danger is pretty obvious, isn't it?
Danger of what? If you want to stay in, then better to vote against the WA and hope to revoke next time. If you want to leave at all costs, then yes, vote for a bird in the hand today.
Whatever you think about Boris. That he is an utter, utter tosser for example, there is no doubt that he is showbiz. If he is due to speak somewhere, there is a tangible buzz in the air before he arrives and his every word is lapped up with relish. That is worth a lot of votes to those who aren't aware of his tosserness.
So as Ken Clarke has presented the only option that has come close to getting over the mark, I wonder what the odds would be on him leading a temporary GNU. He would be far more respected by the EU than anyone else, and consequently would probably get us a very good deal. He could have a couple of the slightly more sensible leavers in cabinet, and some of the grown ups form Labour. It could be agreed for him to use the remainder of this FTPA term, or complete the deal whichever the sooner and then step down and call a GE. It isn't going to happen, but he would be able to bring together a coalition, much like Churchill did, so the wartime narrative will help all the swivel-eyed
My 80/1 on Ken Clarke as next PM hopes so, my one nation Toryism also wants it.
You can't have a GNU without at least one of Labour and the SNP which means their leaders will have a veto on the prime minister, much as Labour refused to work under Chamberlain during the war. I'd suggest that any interim prime minister would head a wholly Conservative government, with confidence and supply from the DUP, precisely as now, and not a GNU.
Agreed, that is more likely, but Ken does have the gravitas to pull a team of "all the talents", and I think the SNP would have little problem with him compared to most Tories, and plenty of Labour MPs compliment him on his integrity.
One point which needs to be re-emphasised, as it seems to be getting a bit lost: if the deal is not approved today, then it follows, as night follows day, that we are leaving the EU in exactly two weeks time, in chaos and without any transition, unless parliament agrees something else which the government and the EU accept. (If that something is 'Revoke' then the EU's acceptance is not required).
Given that MPs are still faffing about discussing how many of their favourite unicorns can fit on a pin-head, and the fact that two weeks is not exactly ample time, the danger is pretty obvious, isn't it?
So who hates the Uk participating in the EU elections more - the EU or the govt ?
Mervyn King's interview on Today this morning was excellent. He favours leaving without a deal but with an agreement to hold the status quo for 6 months to manage the inevitable disruption. (from 2hrs:37mins) https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0003jvs
We don't often agree, Malcolm... By the way Nicola is having a good Brexit. I don't think it's going to lead to independence, but it it is cementing the SNP as the only serious political party in Scotland. They are going to go on and on, Fianna Fail style. Not great for governance in Scotland sadly.
For sure the only grown up politicians in Scotland. The opposition is appalling. I do despair at times of ever seeing independence, unbelievable the crap some people will take and say thanks, but one can hope. PS: Nicola needs to up her game on Indyref2 or else.
I agree the SNP have come out of this well in terms of credibility and respect for their politicians.
But Brexit has probably killed off much chance of Indy - all opponents will have to do is remind people of the Brexit fiasco. If we escape from all this, Scots aren't going to want to go through this themselves. If it goes ahead and does damage, the focus will be on getting the UK back into the EU and again Scots wont want to compound the damage. In the unlikely third scenario where Brexit proceeds and doesn't do damage, the SNP lose the lever of damage having been imposed on Scotland.
One point which needs to be re-emphasised, as it seems to be getting a bit lost: if the deal is not approved today, then it follows, as night follows day, that we are leaving the EU in exactly two weeks time, in chaos and without any transition, unless parliament agrees something else which the government and the EU accept. (If that something is 'Revoke' then the EU's acceptance is not required).
Given that MPs are still faffing about discussing how many of their favourite unicorns can fit on a pin-head, and the fact that two weeks is not exactly ample time, the danger is pretty obvious, isn't it?
Danger of what? If you want to stay in, then better to vote against the WA and hope to revoke next time. If you want to leave at all costs, then yes, vote for a bird in the hand today.
I don't think they'll allow a coronation. If Moran gets taken out then either Brake or Hobhouse, possibly Lamb, will be persuaded to stand against Swinson (and who knows, one of them might fancy it anyway), just to take out the "second successive leader without a proper mandate" line of attack.
Either way I'm staying well clear of the market because I don't know how the process works and have been totally unable to find out.
The "process" is simple - any MP can stand and there are a series of hustings. I attended the London Hustings for both Clegg/Huhne and Farron/Lamb. These are open to all Party members and basically each candidate talks and takes questions.
It's OMOV in our party (no silly colleges). The election will be binary choice if two candidates or STV if three or more.
Oh yeah, that's all fine, I meant the timescales. As in, how plausible is it that Cable announces he'll stand down in May but remains in post until conference.
Mervyn King's interview on Today this morning was excellent. He favours leaving without a deal but with an agreement to hold the status quo for 6 months to manage the inevitable disruption. (from 2hrs:37mins) https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0003jvs
I heard this live - the most sensible and coherent Brexiteer interview for quite some time.
I don't think they'll allow a coronation. If Moran gets taken out then either Brake or Hobhouse, possibly Lamb, will be persuaded to stand against Swinson (and who knows, one of them might fancy it anyway), just to take out the "second successive leader without a proper mandate" line of attack.
Either way I'm staying well clear of the market because I don't know how the process works and have been totally unable to find out.
The "process" is simple - any MP can stand and there are a series of hustings. I attended the London Hustings for both Clegg/Huhne and Farron/Lamb. These are open to all Party members and basically each candidate talks and takes questions.
It's OMOV in our party (no silly colleges). The election will be binary choice if two candidates or STV if three or more.
Oh yeah, that's all fine, I meant the timescales. As in, how plausible is it that Cable announces he'll stand down in May but remains in post until conference.
Whatever you think about Boris. That he is an utter, utter tosser for example, there is no doubt that he is showbiz. If he is due to speak somewhere, there is a tangible buzz in the air before he arrives and his every word is lapped up with relish. That is worth a lot of votes to those who aren't aware of his tosserness.
Yes, I spent a day with him and we were besieged by people wanting selfies with him. In his more popular days, tbf, when he could still be all things to all people. That's gone, now, and showbiz doesn't translate directly into political support.
We don't often agree, Malcolm... By the way Nicola is having a good Brexit. I don't think it's going to lead to independence, but it it is cementing the SNP as the only serious political party in Scotland. They are going to go on and on, Fianna Fail style. Not great for governance in Scotland sadly.
For sure the only grown up politicians in Scotland. The opposition is appalling. I do despair at times of ever seeing independence, unbelievable the crap some people will take and say thanks, but one can hope. PS: Nicola needs to up her game on Indyref2 or else.
I agree the SNP have come out of this well in terms of credibility and respect for their politicians.
But Brexit has probably killed off much chance of Indy - all opponents will have to do is remind people of the Brexit fiasco. If we escape from all this, Scots aren't going to want to go through this themselves. If it goes ahead and does damage, the focus will be on getting the UK back into the EU and again Scots wont want to compound the damage. In the unlikely third scenario where Brexit proceeds and doesn't do damage, the SNP lose the lever of damage having been imposed on Scotland.
The other thing will be the SNP have given plenty of hostages to fortune in their words used to describe Brexit and their policy which will be thrown back at them.
Mervyn King's interview on Today this morning was excellent. He favours leaving without a deal but with an agreement to hold the status quo for 6 months to manage the inevitable disruption. (from 2hrs:37mins) https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0003jvs
I heard this live - the most sensible and coherent Brexiteer interview for quite some time.
I've never heard anything like it from John Humphrys. He didn't challenge King barely once. Mervyn King may have given a reasonable account of himself, but John Humphrys most certainly didn't.
One point which needs to be re-emphasised, as it seems to be getting a bit lost: if the deal is not approved today, then it follows, as night follows day, that we are leaving the EU in exactly two weeks time, in chaos and without any transition, unless parliament agrees something else which the government and the EU accept. (If that something is 'Revoke' then the EU's acceptance is not required).
Given that MPs are still faffing about discussing how many of their favourite unicorns can fit on a pin-head, and the fact that two weeks is not exactly ample time, the danger is pretty obvious, isn't it?
It means IV2 has to identify a majority-supported decision on Monday, and then the government has to (by desire, compulsion or replacement) make parliamentary time available later next week to get the necessary extension application agreed and made.
Without the DUP there’s no chance this deal gets through . They’re acting as a human shield for some of the ERG . It also allows more pro EU Tories to come under less pressure to vote for the deal . Labour MPs won’t move across unless they were very sure it would pass with them .
Much closer for May but a 50 majority against seems more likely .
Mervyn King's interview on Today this morning was excellent. He favours leaving without a deal but with an agreement to hold the status quo for 6 months to manage the inevitable disruption. (from 2hrs:37mins) https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0003jvs
He should get 363 fellow economists to write a letter to The Times saying that.
I don't think they'll allow a coronation. If Moran gets taken out then either Brake or Hobhouse, possibly Lamb, will be persuaded to stand against Swinson (and who knows, one of them might fancy it anyway), just to take out the "second successive leader without a proper mandate" line of attack.
Either way I'm staying well clear of the market because I don't know how the process works and have been totally unable to find out.
The "process" is simple - any MP can stand and there are a series of hustings. I attended the London Hustings for both Clegg/Huhne and Farron/Lamb. These are open to all Party members and basically each candidate talks and takes questions.
It's OMOV in our party (no silly colleges). The election will be binary choice if two candidates or STV if three or more.
Oh yeah, that's all fine, I meant the timescales. As in, how plausible is it that Cable announces he'll stand down in May but remains in post until conference.
Also, isn't it going to be open to non-MPs?
No - that got thrown out. I posted a link a few weeks ago when I saw it reported, but can't find it now.
One point which needs to be re-emphasised, as it seems to be getting a bit lost: if the deal is not approved today, then it follows, as night follows day, that we are leaving the EU in exactly two weeks time, in chaos and without any transition, unless parliament agrees something else which the government and the EU accept. (If that something is 'Revoke' then the EU's acceptance is not required).
Given that MPs are still faffing about discussing how many of their favourite unicorns can fit on a pin-head, and the fact that two weeks is not exactly ample time, the danger is pretty obvious, isn't it?
It means IV2 has to identify a majority-supported decision on Monday, and then the government has to (by desire, compulsion or replacement) make parliamentary time available later next week to get the necessary extension application agreed and made.
And that decision has to be specific and realistic, and Labour have to stop playing cynical games, and the EU have to accept whatever it is, unanimously, and the government has to be able and willing to implement it.
I don't think they'll allow a coronation. If Moran gets taken out then either Brake or Hobhouse, possibly Lamb, will be persuaded to stand against Swinson (and who knows, one of them might fancy it anyway), just to take out the "second successive leader without a proper mandate" line of attack.
Either way I'm staying well clear of the market because I don't know how the process works and have been totally unable to find out.
The "process" is simple - any MP can stand and there are a series of hustings. I attended the London Hustings for both Clegg/Huhne and Farron/Lamb. These are open to all Party members and basically each candidate talks and takes questions.
It's OMOV in our party (no silly colleges). The election will be binary choice if two candidates or STV if three or more.
Oh yeah, that's all fine, I meant the timescales. As in, how plausible is it that Cable announces he'll stand down in May but remains in post until conference.
Correction for stodge - AV not STV
It would be credible in a normal quiet political summer.
One point which needs to be re-emphasised, as it seems to be getting a bit lost: if the deal is not approved today, then it follows, as night follows day, that we are leaving the EU in exactly two weeks time, in chaos and without any transition, unless parliament agrees something else which the government and the EU accept. (If that something is 'Revoke' then the EU's acceptance is not required).
Given that MPs are still faffing about discussing how many of their favourite unicorns can fit on a pin-head, and the fact that two weeks is not exactly ample time, the danger is pretty obvious, isn't it?
It means IV2 has to identify a majority-supported decision on Monday, and then the government has to (by desire, compulsion or replacement) make parliamentary time available later next week to get the necessary extension application agreed and made.
And that decision has to be specific and realistic., and Labour have to stop playing cynical games, and the EU have to accept whatever it is, unanimously, and the government has to be able and willing to implement it.
What is the cumulative probability of that? 5%?
Neither the Govt, Labour nor the EU want a hard brexit in 2 weeks - so can't see how there will be one under any circumstances.
I don't think they'll allow a coronation. If Moran gets taken out then either Brake or Hobhouse, possibly Lamb, will be persuaded to stand against Swinson (and who knows, one of them might fancy it anyway), just to take out the "second successive leader without a proper mandate" line of attack.
Either way I'm staying well clear of the market because I don't know how the process works and have been totally unable to find out.
What you tend to get is a regionalisation. For example, the London parties might well nominate Ed Davey or Tom Brake while Wear Hobhouse might get support from the north, Jo Swinson from Scotland and Layla Moran from the central southern England branches.
So as Ken Clarke has presented the only option that has come close to getting over the mark, I wonder what the odds would be on him leading a temporary GNU. He would be far more respected by the EU than anyone else, and consequently would probably get us a very good deal. He could have a couple of the slightly more sensible leavers in cabinet, and some of the grown ups form Labour. It could be agreed for him to use the remainder of this FTPA term, or complete the deal whichever the sooner and then step down and call a GE. It isn't going to happen, but he would be able to bring together a coalition, much like Churchill did, so the wartime narrative will help all the swivel-eyed
My 80/1 on Ken Clarke as next PM hopes so, my one nation Toryism also wants it.
You can't have a GNU without at least one of Labour and the SNP which means their leaders will have a veto on the prime minister, much as Labour refused to work under Chamberlain during the war. I'd suggest that any interim prime minister would head a wholly Conservative government, with confidence and supply from the DUP, precisely as now, and not a GNU.
Quel surprise, we would not want anyone with an ounce of sense or principles involved, would we.
To be honest, Boris and raab aside all the rest are polling pretty much of muchness.
If you remove the rather surprising result for TMay, it otherwise looks a bit like the indicative vote. More dislikes than likes .It does look like I am not the only Tory voter that thinks Dominic Raab is a lightweight and Boris Johnson is a tosser
Is it a reasonable interpretation that Corbyn and McDonell are trying to achieve a no deal Brexit whilst appearing not to? Today may be the last chance for the Labour moderates.
Tories on here panicking big time, Carlotta rallying the troops
One point which needs to be re-emphasised, as it seems to be getting a bit lost: if the deal is not approved today, then it follows, as night follows day, that we are leaving the EU in exactly two weeks time, in chaos and without any transition, unless parliament agrees something else which the government and the EU accept. (If that something is 'Revoke' then the EU's acceptance is not required).
Given that MPs are still faffing about discussing how many of their favourite unicorns can fit on a pin-head, and the fact that two weeks is not exactly ample time, the danger is pretty obvious, isn't it?
It means IV2 has to identify a majority-supported decision on Monday, and then the government has to (by desire, compulsion or replacement) make parliamentary time available later next week to get the necessary extension application agreed and made.
And that decision has to be specific and realistic., and Labour have to stop playing cynical games, and the EU have to accept whatever it is, unanimously, and the government has to be able and willing to implement it.
What is the cumulative probability of that? 5%?
No, much higher. Remember both most MPs and the EU wants it to succeed. We were granted this short extension specifically to focus on identifying a new way forward, and to push May into going.
The decision doesn't have to have all its details ticked off to get the extension, but does need to appear realistic as you say. Already the options are narrowing to WA+CU, WA+CU+PV, or just possibly WA+PV.
I don't see much chance the EU wont give us time to develop any of these.
The problem is what political chaos at home ensues when the majority of the Tory Party realises its impotence, yet is still nominally in power.
One of the worst things about these endless meaningful votes if having to listen to the ludicrous Cox shout his way through the debate, a relic of the 1950s.
Another bizarre obsession of yours. The man has a grandiose, some might even say pompous, manner of delivery. Why does that agitate you so much?
Is it a reasonable interpretation that Corbyn and McDonell are trying to achieve a no deal Brexit whilst appearing not to? Today may be the last chance for the Labour moderates.
Tories on here panicking big time, Carlotta rallying the troops
Win win for Con party long term malc
Useless May offski either way Chance of a clean Brexit is up If vote wins then some sort of Brexit nailed down. Precedent set that leaving unions is unpleasant - ooops for Nicla..
One point which needs to be re-emphasised, as it seems to be getting a bit lost: if the deal is not approved today, then it follows, as night follows day, that we are leaving the EU in exactly two weeks time, in chaos and without any transition, unless parliament agrees something else which the government and the EU accept. (If that something is 'Revoke' then the EU's acceptance is not required).
Given that MPs are still faffing about discussing how many of their favourite unicorns can fit on a pin-head, and the fact that two weeks is not exactly ample time, the danger is pretty obvious, isn't it?
It is a point I have been making over and over, above and below the line.
Too many in the UK are hoping that the EU will come to our rescue......oh the irony!
On paper, government heading for defeat of 70-80, with approx. 40 Cons against, balanced surprisingly evenly Leave/Remain.
Rumours of a defeat of 20 must surely be government encouragement to Labour rebels, even though (as the above numbers indicate) a defeat of 20 would have to be AFTER Labour rebels are counted and not before.
... The problem is what political chaos at home ensues when the majority of the Tory Party realises its impotence, yet is still nominally in power.
Well, exactly. Simply on the narrow question of implementing what MPs actually agree on, even assuming that they agree on anything, there won't be a government capable of implementing it. The process is completely shot full of holes.
I don't think they'll allow a coronation. If Moran gets taken out then either Brake or Hobhouse, possibly Lamb, will be persuaded to stand against Swinson (and who knows, one of them might fancy it anyway), just to take out the "second successive leader without a proper mandate" line of attack.
Either way I'm staying well clear of the market because I don't know how the process works and have been totally unable to find out.
What you tend to get is a regionalisation. For example, the London parties might well nominate Ed Davey or Tom Brake while Wear Hobhouse might get support from the north, Jo Swinson from Scotland and Layla Moran from the central southern England branches.
Eh? Hobhouse is MP for Bath. Are you just thinking her name sounds northern?
Is it a reasonable interpretation that Corbyn and McDonell are trying to achieve a no deal Brexit whilst appearing not to? Today may be the last chance for the Labour moderates.
Tories on here panicking big time, Carlotta rallying the troops
Win win for Con party long term malc
Useless May offski either way Chance of a clean Brexit is up If vote wins then some sort of Brexit nailed down. Precedent set that leaving unions is unpleasant - ooops for Nicla..
Brexit is a lose lose for all of the UK, but particularly for the Tories, the ex-party of the economy and sensible government.
Thanks. Annoying, I will probably be out around then.
I'll be in the middle of a political lunch at a local Italian. The four of us meet once a quarter to discuss political developments. I use arguments and insights I've rehearsed or learned on here. Today will be something special. We'll glance at our smartphones at 2:45. Don't think there will be any surprise except for what the PM says immediately afterwards.
... The problem is what political chaos at home ensues when the majority of the Tory Party realises its impotence, yet is still nominally in power.
Well, exactly. Simply on the narrow question of implementing what MPs actually agree on, even assuming that they agree on anything, there won't be a government capable of implementing it. The process is completely shot full of holes.
The question however at this stage is simply whether an extension would be granted, and I think the probability in that circumstance is up over 75%.
Is it a reasonable interpretation that Corbyn and McDonell are trying to achieve a no deal Brexit whilst appearing not to? Today may be the last chance for the Labour moderates.
Tories on here panicking big time, Carlotta rallying the troops
Win win for Con party long term malc
Useless May offski either way Chance of a clean Brexit is up If vote wins then some sort of Brexit nailed down. Precedent set that leaving unions is unpleasant - ooops for Nicla..
Brexit is a lose lose for all of the UK, but particularly for the Tories, the ex-party of the economy and sensible government.
That was the old wet establishment May's Remain Tories Nigel. They are finished forever.
One point which needs to be re-emphasised, as it seems to be getting a bit lost: if the deal is not approved today, then it follows, as night follows day, that we are leaving the EU in exactly two weeks time, in chaos and without any transition, unless parliament agrees something else which the government and the EU accept. (If that something is 'Revoke' then the EU's acceptance is not required).
Given that MPs are still faffing about discussing how many of their favourite unicorns can fit on a pin-head, and the fact that two weeks is not exactly ample time, the danger is pretty obvious, isn't it?
It is a point I have been making over and over, anove and below the line.
Too many in the UK are hoping that the EU will come to our rescue......oh the irony!
Everyone in the House including IDS are very confident they will make such an offer - I think they are right but there is a lack of awareness that there is a not insignificant risk somebody will say no (or agree but with absolutely humiliating conditions where the UK will be a curtailed member, not allowed to exercise its membership properly)
Is it a reasonable interpretation that Corbyn and McDonell are trying to achieve a no deal Brexit whilst appearing not to? Today may be the last chance for the Labour moderates.
Tories on here panicking big time, Carlotta rallying the troops
Win win for Con party long term malc
Useless May offski either way Chance of a clean Brexit is up If vote wins then some sort of Brexit nailed down. Precedent set that leaving unions is unpleasant - ooops for Nicla..
I agree leaving a real union is unpleasant , not so much stopping being a colony
You can't blame him for rubbing salt into Theresa May's incompetence. Her approach to him was the first sign of her total inability to build alliances with people she doesn't like, right at the time when it was most needed
Defeat by 90ish is my guess for today. Not sure how they'll play that vs the votes on Monday.
My guess is that they'll look at the number of yes votes, which could be up there with the better options in IV1, and then decide to throw the WA into IV2. Effectively its a route to MV4 but (probably) under AV.
One point which needs to be re-emphasised, as it seems to be getting a bit lost: if the deal is not approved today, then it follows, as night follows day, that we are leaving the EU in exactly two weeks time, in chaos and without any transition, unless parliament agrees something else which the government and the EU accept. (If that something is 'Revoke' then the EU's acceptance is not required).
Given that MPs are still faffing about discussing how many of their favourite unicorns can fit on a pin-head, and the fact that two weeks is not exactly ample time, the danger is pretty obvious, isn't it?
It is a point I have been making over and over, anove and below the line.
Too many in the UK are hoping that the EU will come to our rescue......oh the irony!
Everyone in the House including IDS are very confident they will make such an offer - I think they are right but there is a lack of awareness that there is a not insignificant risk somebody will say no (or agree but with absolutely humiliating conditions where the UK will be a curtailed member, not allowed to exercise its membership properly)
Is it a reasonable interpretation that Corbyn and McDonell are trying to achieve a no deal Brexit whilst appearing not to? Today may be the last chance for the Labour moderates.
Tories on here panicking big time, Carlotta rallying the troops
Win win for Con party long term malc
Useless May offski either way Chance of a clean Brexit is up If vote wins then some sort of Brexit nailed down. Precedent set that leaving unions is unpleasant - ooops for Nicla..
Brexit is a lose lose for all of the UK, but particularly for the Tories, the ex-party of the economy and sensible government.
That was the old wet establishment May's Remain Tories Nigel. They are finished forever.
Ah yes, replaced by Boris Johnson and Jacob Rees Mogg, those fine old-Etonian anti-establishment figures. Guffaw!
Just like with the Labour Party, the grown ups will eventually have to come back to clear up the play room.
On paper, government heading for defeat of 70-80, with approx. 40 Cons against, balanced surprisingly evenly Leave/Remain.
Rumours of a defeat of 20 must surely be government encouragement to Labour rebels, even though (as the above numbers indicate) a defeat of 20 would have to be AFTER Labour rebels are counted and not before.
If that is correct that means about 20 remainer Tory MP voting against the WA which if I recall correctly is at least double the figure from MV2. I think you can draw your own conclusions as to why that might be.
No, some talked up overoptimistic opinions are getting close. It means nothing at all.
Such excessive talk-up carries risks the other way in expectation management, ofcourse ; which is why I think it must be at least a bit significantly closer than before, it not that much.
Is it a reasonable interpretation that Corbyn and McDonell are trying to achieve a no deal Brexit whilst appearing not to? Today may be the last chance for the Labour moderates.
Tories on here panicking big time, Carlotta rallying the troops
Win win for Con party long term malc
Useless May offski either way Chance of a clean Brexit is up If vote wins then some sort of Brexit nailed down. Precedent set that leaving unions is unpleasant - ooops for Nicla..
Brexit is a lose lose for all of the UK, but particularly for the Tories, the ex-party of the economy and sensible government.
That was the old wet establishment May's Remain Tories Nigel. They are finished forever.
Ah yes, replaced by Boris Johnson and Jacob Rees Mogg, those fine old-Etonian anti-establishment figures. Guffaw!
Just like with the Labour Party, the grown ups will eventually have to come back to clear up the play room.
Neither Boris nor JRM will be anywhere near being leader.
No, some talked up overoptimistic opinions are getting close. It means nothing at all.
Such excessive talk-up carries risks the other way in expectation management, ofcourse - which is why I think it must be at least a bit significantly closer than before, it not that much closer.
Talking it up may help switch those who don't like being on the losing side.
One point which needs to be re-emphasised, as it seems to be getting a bit lost: if the deal is not approved today, then it follows, as night follows day, that we are leaving the EU in exactly two weeks time, in chaos and without any transition, unless parliament agrees something else which the government and the EU accept. (If that something is 'Revoke' then the EU's acceptance is not required).
Given that MPs are still faffing about discussing how many of their favourite unicorns can fit on a pin-head, and the fact that two weeks is not exactly ample time, the danger is pretty obvious, isn't it?
It means IV2 has to identify a majority-supported decision on Monday, and then the government has to (by desire, compulsion or replacement) make parliamentary time available later next week to get the necessary extension application agreed and made.
And that decision has to be specific and realistic., and Labour have to stop playing cynical games, and the EU have to accept whatever it is, unanimously, and the government has to be able and willing to implement it.
What is the cumulative probability of that? 5%?
No, much higher. Remember both most MPs and the EU wants it to succeed. We were granted this short extension specifically to focus on identifying a new way forward, and to push May into going.
The decision doesn't have to have all its details ticked off to get the extension, but does need to appear realistic as you say. Already the options are narrowing to WA+CU, WA+CU+PV, or just possibly WA+PV.
I don't see much chance the EU wont give us time to develop any of these.
The problem is what political chaos at home ensues when the majority of the Tory Party realises its impotence, yet is still nominally in power.
But would or should the government agree to any of them? When only 33 Tory MPs out of over 300 voted for the terrible Customs Union idea? And when May goes and the ~280 Tory MPs opposed to a terrible Customs Union choose two candidates opposed to it . . . and the members choose a new PM opposed to it . . . what then?
Mervyn King's interview on Today this morning was excellent. He favours leaving without a deal but with an agreement to hold the status quo for 6 months to manage the inevitable disruption. (from 2hrs:37mins) https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0003jvs
He should get 363 fellow economists to write a letter to The Times saying that.
#WrongThenWrongNow
The Hahn/Nield round-robin letter came from the Cambridge hotbed of radical economic naïvity. It is true that Mervyn did sign it when he was at Birmingham. He became much wiser since. I did not sign it, and many other academic economists I know also refused to sign it.
Everyone in the House including IDS are very confident they will make such an offer - I think they are right but there is a lack of awareness that there is a not insignificant risk somebody will say no (or agree but with absolutely humiliating conditions where the UK will be a curtailed member, not allowed to exercise its membership properly)
I'm not sure if it's technically practical to attach conditions to make the UK a curtailed member, but since everybody's still pretending this is just a temporary state of affairs until the details are sorted out rather than an eternal state of Gimp Remain I can't see anyone would be particularly bothered if they had restricted voting rights or whatever.
One point which needs to be re-emphasised, as it seems to be getting a bit lost: if the deal is not approved today, then it follows, as night follows day, that we are leaving the EU in exactly two weeks time, in chaos and without any transition, unless parliament agrees something else which the government and the EU accept. (If that something is 'Revoke' then the EU's acceptance is not required).
Given that MPs are still faffing about discussing how many of their favourite unicorns can fit on a pin-head, and the fact that two weeks is not exactly ample time, the danger is pretty obvious, isn't it?
It is a point I have been making over and over, anove and below the line.
Too many in the UK are hoping that the EU will come to our rescue......oh the irony!
Everyone in the House including IDS are very confident they will make such an offer - I think they are right but there is a lack of awareness that there is a not insignificant risk somebody will say no (or agree but with absolutely humiliating conditions where the UK will be a curtailed member, not allowed to exercise its membership properly)
I don’t think legally curtailing the UK’s rights as a member would work. But there could certainly be some humiliating conditions.
There is IMO an appreciable risk that they will say that there is no clear political strategy or plan justifying an extension (if the vote is lost today and Monday’s votes bring no clarity) and, therefore, there will be no extension but Britain is free to revoke and remain a member as before. That has the advantage from their perspective that it puts the blame for a No Deal exit very firmly on Britain. It also puts pressure on those MPs trying to cobble together a deal to get a move on.
They may well also make clear that any future talks on anything are conditional on the full £39 billion being paid etc ie don’t assume that just because you’ve left with No Deal you walk away from your obligations.
Is it a reasonable interpretation that Corbyn and McDonell are trying to achieve a no deal Brexit whilst appearing not to? Today may be the last chance for the Labour moderates.
Tories on here panicking big time, Carlotta rallying the troops
Win win for Con party long term malc
Useless May offski either way Chance of a clean Brexit is up If vote wins then some sort of Brexit nailed down. Precedent set that leaving unions is unpleasant - ooops for Nicla..
I agree leaving a real union is unpleasant , not so much stopping being a colony
Such silly nonsense you spout, As I said the other day, Scots have been massively overrepresented in the British state and were responsible for leading colonialism in the hay day of Empire. The number of politicians and generals who either were Scottish or had Scottish lineage is too big to list; you could say that the Scots have colonised Britain! Nationalists the world over get off on their own lies and fake grievances, but few can out-do the mendacity of the Scottish variety.
Mervyn King's interview on Today this morning was excellent. He favours leaving without a deal but with an agreement to hold the status quo for 6 months to manage the inevitable disruption. (from 2hrs:37mins) https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0003jvs
He should get 363 fellow economists to write a letter to The Times saying that.
#WrongThenWrongNow
The Hahn/Nield round-robin letter came from the Cambridge hotbed of radical economic naïvity. It is true that Mervyn did sign it when he was at Birmingham. He became much wiser since. I did not sign it, and many other academic economists I know also refused to sign it.
He was so wise he didn’t even spot the credit crisis of 2007.
Mervyn King's interview on Today this morning was excellent. He favours leaving without a deal but with an agreement to hold the status quo for 6 months to manage the inevitable disruption. (from 2hrs:37mins) https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0003jvs
I heard this live - the most sensible and coherent Brexiteer interview for quite some time.
I've never heard anything like it from John Humphrys. He didn't challenge King barely once. Mervyn King may have given a reasonable account of himself, but John Humphrys most certainly didn't.
So - are you complaining that he didn't interrupt and prevent Mr King from putting forward his answers to the questions - like most of the BBC reporters fail to do when interviewing Remainers.
On paper, government heading for defeat of 70-80, with approx. 40 Cons against, balanced surprisingly evenly Leave/Remain.
Rumours of a defeat of 20 must surely be government encouragement to Labour rebels, even though (as the above numbers indicate) a defeat of 20 would have to be AFTER Labour rebels are counted and not before.
If that is correct that means about 20 remainer Tory MP voting against the WA which if I recall correctly is at least double the figure from MV2. I think you can draw your own conclusions as to why that might be.
Sorry that's not the implication - as far as I'm aware there are no new rebels (we shall see...)
I just wanted to challenge this idea that the Con rebels are ERGers. As Leavers decide to back the deal, the remaining rebels are, well, more and more Remainers
One point which needs to be re-emphasised, as it seems to be getting a bit lost: if the deal is not approved today, then it follows, as night follows day, that we are leaving the EU in exactly two weeks time, in chaos and without any transition, unless parliament agrees something else which the government and the EU accept. (If that something is 'Revoke' then the EU's acceptance is not required).
Given that MPs are still faffing about discussing how many of their favourite unicorns can fit on a pin-head, and the fact that two weeks is not exactly ample time, the danger is pretty obvious, isn't it?
It means IV2 has to identify a majority-supported decision on Monday, and then the government has to (by desire, compulsion or replacement) make parliamentary time available later next week to get the necessary extension application agreed and made.
And that decision has to be specific and realistic., and Labour have to stop playing cynical games, and the EU have to accept whatever it is, unanimously, and the government has to be able and willing to implement it.
What is the cumulative probability of that? 5%?
No, much higher. Remember both most MPs and the EU wants it to succeed. We were granted this short extension specifically to focus on identifying a new way forward, and to push May into going.
The decision doesn't have to have all its details ticked off to get the extension, but does need to appear realistic as you say. Already the options are narrowing to WA+CU, WA+CU+PV, or just possibly WA+PV.
I don't see much chance the EU wont give us time to develop any of these.
The problem is what political chaos at home ensues when the majority of the Tory Party realises its impotence, yet is still nominally in power.
But would or should the government agree to any of them? When only 33 Tory MPs out of over 300 voted for the terrible Customs Union idea? And when May goes and the ~280 Tory MPs opposed to a terrible Customs Union choose two candidates opposed to it . . . and the members choose a new PM opposed to it . . . what then?
Everything else has been designed for the Tory Party, if the Tory Party needs votes from other parties to pass its stuff then they could and should suck it up and compromise. But if they don't want to do that then a new election is also an option for them.
One point which needs to be re-emphasised, as it seems to be getting a bit lost: if the deal is not approved today, then it follows, as night follows day, that we are leaving the EU in exactly two weeks time, in chaos and without any transition, unless parliament agrees something else which the government and the EU accept. (If that something is 'Revoke' then the EU's acceptance is not required).
Given that MPs are still faffing about discussing how many of their favourite unicorns can fit on a pin-head, and the fact that two weeks is not exactly ample time, the danger is pretty obvious, isn't it?
Yes, but listening to IDS this morning it seems like if the WA does miraculously pass today we then have less than eight weeks of failing to get the ERG to vote for the legal detail of what they vote for today, and then having a choice between no deal, or revoking without Euro elections and smashing up the legal order of the EU.
They may well also make clear that any future talks on anything are conditional on the full £39 billion being paid etc ie don’t assume that just because you’ve left with No Deal you walk away from your obligations.
They have already made that clear, except that they didn't name a specific figure. Presumably that part of the estimated £39bn which relates to payments during the transition would apply only if there were a similar transition period. I'm not sure how any transition could legally work if we were applying from the outside.
Comments
https://twitter.com/tommctague/status/1111583731545001984?s=21
(from 2hrs:37mins)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0003jvs
But Brexit has probably killed off much chance of Indy - all opponents will have to do is remind people of the Brexit fiasco. If we escape from all this, Scots aren't going to want to go through this themselves. If it goes ahead and does damage, the focus will be on getting the UK back into the EU and again Scots wont want to compound the damage. In the unlikely third scenario where Brexit proceeds and doesn't do damage, the SNP lose the lever of damage having been imposed on Scotland.
Much closer for May but a 50 majority against seems more likely .
#WrongThenWrongNow
What is the cumulative probability of that? 5%?
It would be credible in a normal quiet political summer.
Long extension into the long grass.
Walk out in disgust? Call for a rerun? Revoke the election?
On past form the anti democrats simply don’t accept the public/party members decision as more worthy than their high opinion of themselves
The decision doesn't have to have all its details ticked off to get the extension, but does need to appear realistic as you say. Already the options are narrowing to WA+CU, WA+CU+PV, or just possibly WA+PV.
I don't see much chance the EU wont give us time to develop any of these.
The problem is what political chaos at home ensues when the majority of the Tory Party realises its impotence, yet is still nominally in power.
https://twitter.com/George_Osborne/status/1111588312207290368
Useless May offski either way
Chance of a clean Brexit is up
If vote wins then some sort of Brexit nailed down.
Precedent set that leaving unions is unpleasant - ooops for Nicla..
Too many in the UK are hoping that the EU will come to our rescue......oh the irony!
Rumours of a defeat of 20 must surely be government encouragement to Labour rebels, even though (as the above numbers indicate) a defeat of 20 would have to be AFTER Labour rebels are counted and not before.
#PetTheftAwarenessWeek?
https://twitter.com/RossThomson_MP
Just like with the Labour Party, the grown ups will eventually have to come back to clear up the play room.
aka Neutered or new turd.
Nando's is giving away free food in Manchester from TODAY, with giant loyalty cards across the UK
https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/whats-on/food-drink-news/nandos-free-food-manchester-printworks-16045773
There is IMO an appreciable risk that they will say that there is no clear political strategy or plan justifying an extension (if the vote is lost today and Monday’s votes bring no clarity) and, therefore, there will be no extension but Britain is free to revoke and remain a member as before. That has the advantage from their perspective that it puts the blame for a No Deal exit very firmly on Britain. It also puts pressure on those MPs trying to cobble together a deal to get a move on.
They may well also make clear that any future talks on anything are conditional on the full £39 billion being paid etc ie don’t assume that just because you’ve left with No Deal you walk away from your obligations.
I just wanted to challenge this idea that the Con rebels are ERGers. As Leavers decide to back the deal, the remaining rebels are, well, more and more Remainers
So that could end up being worse.