Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Very shortly the credibility of so many Tory leavers could be

124678

Comments

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    Pulpstar said:

    How are MPs meant to vote on G) ? parliament can't vote two options against each other in one vote.

    It's a motion to revoke if we look to be heading out with no deal. The interesting bit is it is pushing the laughable'revoke and maybe we will reinvoke option'. Clause 4 looks extremely woolly.

    That -(1) If, at midday on the second last Day before exit day, the condition specified in section 13(1)(d) of the Act (the passing of legislation approving a withdrawal agreement) is not satisfied, Her Majesty’s Government must immediately seek the agreement of the European Council under Article 50(3) of the Treaty to extend the date upon which the Treaties shall cease to apply to the United Kingdom;

    (2) If, at midday on the last Day before exit day, no agreement has been reached (pursuant to (1) above) to extend the date upon which the Treaties shall cease to apply to the United Kingdom, Her Majesty’s Government must immediately put a motion to the House of Commons asking it to approve ‘No Deal’;

    (3) If the House does not approve the motion at (2) above, Her Majesty’s Government must immediately ensure that the notice given to the European Council under Article 50 of the United Kingdom’s intention to withdraw from the European Union is revoked in accordance with United Kingdom and European law;

    (4) If the United Kingdom’s notice under Article 50 is revoked pursuant to (3) above a Minister of Her Majesty’s Government shall cause an inquiry to be held under the Inquiries Act 2005 into the question whether a model of a future relationship with the European Union likely to be acceptable to the European Union is likely to have majority support in the United Kingdom;

    (5) If there is a referendum it shall be held on the question whether to trigger Article 50 and renegotiate that model;

    (6) The Inquiry under paragraph (4) shall start within three months of the revocation; and

    (7) References in this Motion to “Days” are to House of Commons sitting days; references to “exit day” are references to exit day as defined in the Act; references to the Act are to The European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018; and references to the Treaty are to the Treaty on European Union
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,846
    kle4 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Scott_P said:
    I thought they voted for all of these last week and nothing passed?
    Yes. The plan is to do it again and Wednesday. Not sure when, if ever, it becomes an eliminator round!
    Has Bercow given up on his rule about not bringing back the same motion again?
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,695
    Pulpstar said:

    A, F and G should be eliminated I think.

    Shame Brucie has died...

    Play Your Brexit Cards Right....

    Good Game. Good Game.

    :D
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    edited March 2019

    kle4 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Scott_P said:
    I thought they voted for all of these last week and nothing passed?
    Yes. The plan is to do it again and Wednesday. Not sure when, if ever, it becomes an eliminator round!
    Has Bercow given up on his rule about not bringing back the same motion again?
    Part of the Letwin plan

    notwithstanding the practice of the House, any motion on matters that have been the subject of a prior decision of the House in the current Session may be the subject of a decision

    If there was a majority for the deal it seems the gov could always have gotten round Bercow if they had to, but there isn't. Given the Letwin motion is explicit in allowing past rejected decisions to be reconsidered it'd be a bit weird if the House did not direct the speaker to allow the MV again, if they want.
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143

    GIN1138 said:

    Gauke might need a UNICORN to get out of this one! :D

    Never thought much of Gauke since was Osborne’s Chief Sec to the Treasury and ordinarily wouldn’t be sorry to see him sacked because he is as hopeless as Grayling but in fairness to him he has been very loyal to May.

    As a Leaver, I still prefer broad church political parties to narrow single issue ones.
    It looks like we will end up with two narrow parties at each extreme and FPTP causing carnage among the innocent moderates in between.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,909
    GIN1138 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    A, F and G should be eliminated I think.

    Shame Brucie has died...

    Play Your Brexit Cards Right....

    Good Game. Good Game.

    :D
    Nice to Leave you, to Leave you!

    Nice!
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,080
    The MPs seem to want to make this unnecessarily complicated. A permanent Customs Union is the obvious front runner and needs to be put back into the process. There's a question as to whether a referendum should be tied to it, producing a second option. The government needs to decide whether to throw May's deal into the mix for a quasi-MV4; if they do, there's a third option. If they are willing to subject this to a referendum as well, there's a possible fourth option. No deal and revoke probably have to stay in the process to give the people on each of the spectrum something to support before their preferences are transferred. So six in total, even if the government plays ball. Even if Labour's semi-unicorn has to stay in as the official opposition's first choice, that's only seven. Five if HMG doesn't want May's deal in the field.

    Surely that should be it?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    IanB2 said:

    The MPs seem to want to make this unnecessarily complicated.

    A post which sums up a great deal about the whole Brexit process. Not aided by May's' shenanigans, but still.
  • ralphmalphralphmalph Posts: 2,201

    viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    I hope you'll all be as moved as I was.

    https://twitter.com/MhairiMcF/status/1112389540533227520

    How does one pronounce "Mhairi"?
    In theory the 'Mh' should always be 'V' in Gaelic, though a lot of Mhairis seem to go for Marree.
    So it's either pronounced "Varry" or "Marry", and one doesn't know which it is until one asks. Aaargh... :(
    It's revenge for Featherstonaugh.
    I know how to pronounce that. And Taliaferro. And St. James. And Siobhan. And Taoiseach. And Tanaiste. But "Mhari" defeats me.
    My own first name is the Gaelic version of John, fairly common, but a few others for your delectation:

    Tormod
    Uisdean
    Eachann
    Friseal
    Teàrlach

    and of course the biggy

    Dòmhnall
    To me nothing beats Hamish as being a Scottish name.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,695

    GIN1138 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    A, F and G should be eliminated I think.

    Shame Brucie has died...

    Play Your Brexit Cards Right....

    Good Game. Good Game.

    :D
    Nice to Leave you, to Leave you!

    Nice!
    :D
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,092
    Fascinating article on how the EU and Ireland will manage the border if UK leaves without a deal.

    . . . It is rising concern that a ‘no deal’ might sooner or later become unavoidable that leads Europe’s two big political beasts to Mr Varadkar’s door to seek clarity on how the Irish border would be managed.

    Because a ‘no deal’ presents the EU with a political trilemma - balancing the need to show solidarity with Ireland, while supporting the Good Friday Agreement and ‘no hard border’, and protecting the integrity of the EU single market. . . .


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/03/30/leo-varadkar-hold-talks-angela-merkel-emmanuel-macron-reality/
  • OllyTOllyT Posts: 4,911

    kle4 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Scott_P said:
    I thought they voted for all of these last week and nothing passed?
    Yes. The plan is to do it again and Wednesday. Not sure when, if ever, it becomes an eliminator round!
    Has Bercow given up on his rule about not bringing back the same motion again?
    I understood it was stage 2 of the same indicative process
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,909

    viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    I hope you'll all be as moved as I was.

    https://twitter.com/MhairiMcF/status/1112389540533227520

    How does one pronounce "Mhairi"?
    In theory the 'Mh' should always be 'V' in Gaelic, though a lot of Mhairis seem to go for Marree.
    So it's either pronounced "Varry" or "Marry", and one doesn't know which it is until one asks. Aaargh... :(
    It's revenge for Featherstonaugh.
    I know how to pronounce that. And Taliaferro. And St. James. And Siobhan. And Taoiseach. And Tanaiste. But "Mhari" defeats me.
    My own first name is the Gaelic version of John, fairly common, but a few others for your delectation:

    Tormod
    Uisdean
    Eachann
    Friseal
    Teàrlach

    and of course the biggy

    Dòmhnall
    Súníl ò'Pràsànnàn
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 15,542
    edited March 2019
    viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    I hope you'll all be as moved as I was.

    https://twitter.com/MhairiMcF/status/1112389540533227520

    How does one pronounce "Mhairi"?
    In theory the 'Mh' should always be 'V' in Gaelic, though a lot of Mhairis seem to go for Marree.
    So it's either pronounced "Varry" or "Marry", and one doesn't know which it is until one asks. Aaargh... :(
    Not an expert, but I think the h added after the initial consonant in Gaelic puts the word into the vocative case. Mairi is the nominative but when you address her or do something to her she becomes Mhairi (pronounced "Vahri")
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,786
    GIN1138 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    A, F and G should be eliminated I think.

    Shame Brucie has died...

    Play Your Brexit Cards Right....

    Good Game. Good Game.

    :D
    They should do it like Pointless. When they find an option that absolutely nobody wants, that’s the winner.
  • kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 3,911

    GIN1138 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    A, F and G should be eliminated I think.

    Shame Brucie has died...

    Play Your Brexit Cards Right....

    Good Game. Good Game.

    :D
    They should do it like Pointless. When they find an option that absolutely nobody wants, that’s the winner.
    Schengen and the Euro?
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 3,623
    edited March 2019
    IanB2 said:

    The MPs seem to want to make this unnecessarily complicated. A permanent Customs Union is the obvious front runner and needs to be put back into the process. There's a question as to whether a referendum should be tied to it, producing a second option. The government needs to decide whether to throw May's deal into the mix for a quasi-MV4; if they do, there's a third option. If they are willing to subject this to a referendum as well, there's a possible fourth option. No deal and revoke probably have to stay in the process to give the people on each of the spectrum something to support before their preferences are transferred. So six in total, even if the government plays ball. Even if Labour's semi-unicorn has to stay in as the official opposition's first choice, that's only seven. Five if HMG doesn't want May's deal in the field.

    Surely that should be it?

    And whatever the final choice is they should be made to rank them or knock out the least popular etc. and not just vote them as individual propositions. I assume that is the general idea, although whether that is the specific idea for tomorrow, not sure.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,695

    GIN1138 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    A, F and G should be eliminated I think.

    Shame Brucie has died...

    Play Your Brexit Cards Right....

    Good Game. Good Game.

    :D
    They should do it like Pointless. When they find an option that absolutely nobody wants, that’s the winner.
    That could be one way to NO DEAL!!!! :D
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,909
    edited March 2019

    viewcode said:

    I hope you'll all be as moved as I was.

    https://twitter.com/MhairiMcF/status/1112389540533227520

    How does one pronounce "Mhairi"?
    In theory the 'Mh' should always be 'V' in Gaelic, though a lot of Mhairis seem to go for Marree.

    'Mh' is also meant to be 'V' in Irish.
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 3,623
    edited March 2019
    edit - double post

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    edited March 2019

    IanB2 said:

    The MPs seem to want to make this unnecessarily complicated. A permanent Customs Union is the obvious front runner and needs to be put back into the process. There's a question as to whether a referendum should be tied to it, producing a second option. The government needs to decide whether to throw May's deal into the mix for a quasi-MV4; if they do, there's a third option. If they are willing to subject this to a referendum as well, there's a possible fourth option. No deal and revoke probably have to stay in the process to give the people on each of the spectrum something to support before their preferences are transferred. So six in total, even if the government plays ball. Even if Labour's semi-unicorn has to stay in as the official opposition's first choice, that's only seven. Five if HMG doesn't want May's deal in the field.

    Surely that should be it?

    And whatever the final choice is they should be made to rank them or knock out the least popular etc. and not just vote them as individual propositions. I assume that is the general idea, although whether that is the specific idea for tomorrow, not sure.
    Doesn't seem to be given Wednesday is also to be used, so not sure what the first round even accomplished. Multi stage is fine, but it could be knocked out in a day.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,670
    IanB2 said:

    The MPs seem to want to make this unnecessarily complicated. A permanent Customs Union is the obvious front runner and needs to be put back into the process. There's a question as to whether a referendum should be tied to it, producing a second option. The government needs to decide whether to throw May's deal into the mix for a quasi-MV4; if they do, there's a third option. If they are willing to subject this to a referendum as well, there's a possible fourth option. No deal and revoke probably have to stay in the process to give the people on each of the spectrum something to support before their preferences are transferred. So six in total, even if the government plays ball. Even if Labour's semi-unicorn has to stay in as the official opposition's first choice, that's only seven. Five if HMG doesn't want May's deal in the field.

    Surely that should be it?

    what is the point then , we are just as well staying as we are and having some influence rather than paying all the fees and being told what to do , what our laws are , etc.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,839
    malcolmg said:

    IanB2 said:

    The MPs seem to want to make this unnecessarily complicated. A permanent Customs Union is the obvious front runner and needs to be put back into the process. There's a question as to whether a referendum should be tied to it, producing a second option. The government needs to decide whether to throw May's deal into the mix for a quasi-MV4; if they do, there's a third option. If they are willing to subject this to a referendum as well, there's a possible fourth option. No deal and revoke probably have to stay in the process to give the people on each of the spectrum something to support before their preferences are transferred. So six in total, even if the government plays ball. Even if Labour's semi-unicorn has to stay in as the official opposition's first choice, that's only seven. Five if HMG doesn't want May's deal in the field.

    Surely that should be it?

    what is the point then , we are just as well staying as we are and having some influence rather than paying all the fees and being told what to do , what our laws are , etc.
    Yeah, this is why a true Norway option is superior. Cut Northern Ireland off at the knees.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,708

    Scott_P said:
    We had 8 options voted on the other day. Wasn't that supposed to have greatly narrowed the field?

    This is the Legislature taking the piss.....on the road to No Deal.
    Letwin I believe wants to shift from FPTP last week to AV or STV next week to ensure a majority for 1 of the options which Bercow chooses. May then intends to put her Deal up against whichever option wins the indicative votes in a final Brexit runoff amongst MPs
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,341

    GIN1138 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    A, F and G should be eliminated I think.

    Shame Brucie has died...

    Play Your Brexit Cards Right....

    Good Game. Good Game.

    :D
    They should do it like Pointless. When they find an option that absolutely nobody wants, that’s the winner.
    Customs Union with North Korea. Single Market with Somalia. Free Travel Area with Syria. Currency Union with Venezuela and Zimbabwe.

  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195
    malcolmg said:

    IanB2 said:

    The MPs seem to want to make this unnecessarily complicated. A permanent Customs Union is the obvious front runner and needs to be put back into the process. There's a question as to whether a referendum should be tied to it, producing a second option. The government needs to decide whether to throw May's deal into the mix for a quasi-MV4; if they do, there's a third option. If they are willing to subject this to a referendum as well, there's a possible fourth option. No deal and revoke probably have to stay in the process to give the people on each of the spectrum something to support before their preferences are transferred. So six in total, even if the government plays ball. Even if Labour's semi-unicorn has to stay in as the official opposition's first choice, that's only seven. Five if HMG doesn't want May's deal in the field.

    Surely that should be it?

    what is the point then , we are just as well staying as we are and having some influence rather than paying all the fees and being told what to do , what our laws are , etc.
    Remember that next time you try for independence Malc.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195
    kyf_100 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    A, F and G should be eliminated I think.

    Shame Brucie has died...

    Play Your Brexit Cards Right....

    Good Game. Good Game.

    :D
    They should do it like Pointless. When they find an option that absolutely nobody wants, that’s the winner.
    Schengen and the Euro?
    Sounds like Williams wet dream
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,080
    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    The MPs seem to want to make this unnecessarily complicated. A permanent Customs Union is the obvious front runner and needs to be put back into the process. There's a question as to whether a referendum should be tied to it, producing a second option. The government needs to decide whether to throw May's deal into the mix for a quasi-MV4; if they do, there's a third option. If they are willing to subject this to a referendum as well, there's a possible fourth option. No deal and revoke probably have to stay in the process to give the people on each of the spectrum something to support before their preferences are transferred. So six in total, even if the government plays ball. Even if Labour's semi-unicorn has to stay in as the official opposition's first choice, that's only seven. Five if HMG doesn't want May's deal in the field.

    Surely that should be it?

    And whatever the final choice is they should be made to rank them or knock out the least popular etc. and not just vote them as individual propositions. I assume that is the general idea, although whether that is the specific idea for tomorrow, not sure.
    Doesn't seem to be given Wednesday is also to be used, so not sure what the first round even accomplished. Multi stage is fine, but it could be knocked out in a day.
    They should use AV, which is clearly what Letwin wants, but he is of course dealing with a load of dinosaurs used to 18th century procedure.

    As I understood it tomorrow was to identify a preferred option and Wednesday, maybe, was to choose between it and May's deal and decide how to proceed.

    The useless load of motions tabled by MPs don't fill me with great hope that someone is in command of this process. Yet I thought the same last Wednesday, but Bercow did a great job cutting out all the pointless options and wrecking amendments. I can only hope he'll do the same tomorrow.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,839
    algarkirk said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    A, F and G should be eliminated I think.

    Shame Brucie has died...

    Play Your Brexit Cards Right....

    Good Game. Good Game.

    :D
    They should do it like Pointless. When they find an option that absolutely nobody wants, that’s the winner.
    Customs Union with North Korea. Single Market with Somalia. Free Travel Area with Syria. Currency Union with Venezuela and Zimbabwe.

    Schengen with Africa.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,080
    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    The MPs seem to want to make this unnecessarily complicated.

    A post which sums up a great deal about the whole Brexit process. Not aided by May's' shenanigans, but still.
    Part of the problem is that a good proportion of the Tory backbenches just want to wreck it.
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,960
    algarkirk said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    A, F and G should be eliminated I think.

    Shame Brucie has died...

    Play Your Brexit Cards Right....

    Good Game. Good Game.

    :D
    They should do it like Pointless. When they find an option that absolutely nobody wants, that’s the winner.
    Customs Union with North Korea. Single Market with Somalia. Free Travel Area with Syria. Currency Union with Venezuela and Zimbabwe.

    Leave, but join the Euro. And Scotland continues paying our membership fees out of the N Sea oil revenue we don't let them have.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,846
    IanB2 said:

    The MPs seem to want to make this unnecessarily complicated. A permanent Customs Union is the obvious front runner and needs to be put back into the process. There's a question as to whether a referendum should be tied to it, producing a second option. The government needs to decide whether to throw May's deal into the mix for a quasi-MV4; if they do, there's a third option. If they are willing to subject this to a referendum as well, there's a possible fourth option. No deal and revoke probably have to stay in the process to give the people on each of the spectrum something to support before their preferences are transferred. So six in total, even if the government plays ball. Even if Labour's semi-unicorn has to stay in as the official opposition's first choice, that's only seven. Five if HMG doesn't want May's deal in the field.

    Surely that should be it?

    'A' permanent customs union will destroy a significant proportion of our non EU trade overnight.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981
    IanB2 said:

    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    The MPs seem to want to make this unnecessarily complicated. A permanent Customs Union is the obvious front runner and needs to be put back into the process. There's a question as to whether a referendum should be tied to it, producing a second option. The government needs to decide whether to throw May's deal into the mix for a quasi-MV4; if they do, there's a third option. If they are willing to subject this to a referendum as well, there's a possible fourth option. No deal and revoke probably have to stay in the process to give the people on each of the spectrum something to support before their preferences are transferred. So six in total, even if the government plays ball. Even if Labour's semi-unicorn has to stay in as the official opposition's first choice, that's only seven. Five if HMG doesn't want May's deal in the field.

    Surely that should be it?

    And whatever the final choice is they should be made to rank them or knock out the least popular etc. and not just vote them as individual propositions. I assume that is the general idea, although whether that is the specific idea for tomorrow, not sure.
    Doesn't seem to be given Wednesday is also to be used, so not sure what the first round even accomplished. Multi stage is fine, but it could be knocked out in a day.
    They should use AV, which is clearly what Letwin wants, but he is of course dealing with a load of dinosaurs used to 18th century procedure.

    As I understood it tomorrow was to identify a preferred option and Wednesday, maybe, was to choose between it and May's deal and decide how to proceed.

    The useless load of motions tabled by MPs don't fill me with great hope that someone is in command of this process. Yet I thought the same last Wednesday, but Bercow did a great job cutting out all the pointless options and wrecking amendments. I can only hope he'll do the same tomorrow.
    Lots to get through tomorrow. How long will be allocated to the Great Petition Debate?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,952

    GIN1138 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    A, F and G should be eliminated I think.

    Shame Brucie has died...

    Play Your Brexit Cards Right....

    Good Game. Good Game.

    :D
    Nice to Leave you, to Leave you!

    Nice!
    Why are we only leaving a small part of France?
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981
    Ishmael_Z said:

    IanB2 said:

    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    The MPs seem to want to make this unnecessarily complicated. A permanent Customs Union is the obvious front runner and needs to be put back into the process. There's a question as to whether a referendum should be tied to it, producing a second option. The government needs to decide whether to throw May's deal into the mix for a quasi-MV4; if they do, there's a third option. If they are willing to subject this to a referendum as well, there's a possible fourth option. No deal and revoke probably have to stay in the process to give the people on each of the spectrum something to support before their preferences are transferred. So six in total, even if the government plays ball. Even if Labour's semi-unicorn has to stay in as the official opposition's first choice, that's only seven. Five if HMG doesn't want May's deal in the field.

    Surely that should be it?

    And whatever the final choice is they should be made to rank them or knock out the least popular etc. and not just vote them as individual propositions. I assume that is the general idea, although whether that is the specific idea for tomorrow, not sure.
    Doesn't seem to be given Wednesday is also to be used, so not sure what the first round even accomplished. Multi stage is fine, but it could be knocked out in a day.
    They should use AV, which is clearly what Letwin wants, but he is of course dealing with a load of dinosaurs used to 18th century procedure.

    As I understood it tomorrow was to identify a preferred option and Wednesday, maybe, was to choose between it and May's deal and decide how to proceed.

    The useless load of motions tabled by MPs don't fill me with great hope that someone is in command of this process. Yet I thought the same last Wednesday, but Bercow did a great job cutting out all the pointless options and wrecking amendments. I can only hope he'll do the same tomorrow.
    Lots to get through tomorrow. How long will be allocated to the Great Petition Debate?
    Edit: and which MP will put his/er head above the parapet and speak in favour of Revoke?
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,279
    re Newport West, a Guardian reporter filed this on the by-election.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/mar/31/newport-west-byelection-voters-look-away-from-main-parties-for-renewal?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

    Apologies if others posted a link earlier.
  • AmpfieldAndyAmpfieldAndy Posts: 1,445
    edited March 2019
    Surprised Boles is still taking the Tory Whip after resigning from Grantham. Doubt Smith will worry to much about what Boles thinks and for once Smith would be right.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,670
    Floater said:

    malcolmg said:

    IanB2 said:

    The MPs seem to want to make this unnecessarily complicated. A permanent Customs Union is the obvious front runner and needs to be put back into the process. There's a question as to whether a referendum should be tied to it, producing a second option. The government needs to decide whether to throw May's deal into the mix for a quasi-MV4; if they do, there's a third option. If they are willing to subject this to a referendum as well, there's a possible fourth option. No deal and revoke probably have to stay in the process to give the people on each of the spectrum something to support before their preferences are transferred. So six in total, even if the government plays ball. Even if Labour's semi-unicorn has to stay in as the official opposition's first choice, that's only seven. Five if HMG doesn't want May's deal in the field.

    Surely that should be it?

    what is the point then , we are just as well staying as we are and having some influence rather than paying all the fees and being told what to do , what our laws are , etc.
    Remember that next time you try for independence Malc.
    They should grow a pair then and just leave, they are bigger fearties than Scotland , seems whole of UK is spineless Full of wind and piss and scared to do it for themselves.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,670
    Endillion said:

    algarkirk said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    A, F and G should be eliminated I think.

    Shame Brucie has died...

    Play Your Brexit Cards Right....

    Good Game. Good Game.

    :D
    They should do it like Pointless. When they find an option that absolutely nobody wants, that’s the winner.
    Customs Union with North Korea. Single Market with Somalia. Free Travel Area with Syria. Currency Union with Venezuela and Zimbabwe.

    Leave, but join the Euro. And Scotland continues paying our membership fees out of the N Sea oil revenue we don't let them have.
    Never a truer word said in jest.
  • _Anazina__Anazina_ Posts: 1,810
    nico67 said:

    I expect Bercow to cut the choices down to a max of 6 . Can’t see him picking no deal again and the backstop one either as that’s got no chance of being negotiated .

    They should chalk off all but the three most popular options.
  • _Anazina__Anazina_ Posts: 1,810
    Foxy said:

    kle4 said:

    Thank you Hugo Lloris.

    Being a Liverpool fan is going to kill me.

    A Tory and Liverpool fan - a nervous time for you.

    I'm just hoping Liverpool are the Leicester of this year - clearly not the best team in the league, but squeak over the line nevertheless.

    The problem is the indicative votes process - which I support - needs to reach a result reasonably quickly to be credible. Dragging the process out is exactly the faint lifeline May needs to keep hanging on by her fingertips. The HoC coalescing around something quickly is important, not least because of the time pressures.

    Also some of these options are a bit...weird. I hope they make more sense on the order paper than in a tweet.

    Some of them do not

    https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmagenda/OP190401.pdf

    I'm irritated it is not even the plan to definitively settle it tomorrow. Given they had a first go last week, why couldn't they say that no matter what tomorrow they whittle them down to the final option? It adds to the question of what last week was even about.

    I really don't see why Bercow would call some of them again though, if they receive so few votes last time
    Leicester were the best team of the year, and we have trophy to prove it :)

    Looks like we may well spoil Wolves party. Shame :(
    Leicester were the best team in the league that year. Liverpool certainly are not the best team in the league this year. City are far superior. But, football can be a capricious mistress.
  • _Anazina__Anazina_ Posts: 1,810
    The big question is whether Utd will roll over on derby day to stop Liverpool winning the title. I think they might. A title for Liverpool is a living nightmare for Utd supporters. They can live with City winning it.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,262
    GIN1138 said:

    Scott_P said:
    I thought they voted for all of these last week and nothing passed?
    G is new
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,050
    _Anazina_ said:

    Foxy said:

    kle4 said:

    Thank you Hugo Lloris.

    Being a Liverpool fan is going to kill me.

    A Tory and Liverpool fan - a nervous time for you.

    I'm just hoping Liverpool are the Leicester of this year - clearly not the best team in the league, but squeak over the line nevertheless.

    The problem is the indicative votes process - which I support - needs to reach a result reasonably quickly to be credible. Dragging the process out is exactly the faint lifeline May needs to keep hanging on by her fingertips. The HoC coalescing around something quickly is important, not least because of the time pressures.

    Also some of these options are a bit...weird. I hope they make more sense on the order paper than in a tweet.

    Some of them do not

    https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmagenda/OP190401.pdf

    I'm irritated it is not even the plan to definitively settle it tomorrow. Given they had a first go last week, why couldn't they say that no matter what tomorrow they whittle them down to the final option? It adds to the question of what last week was even about.

    I really don't see why Bercow would call some of them again though, if they receive so few votes last time
    Leicester were the best team of the year, and we have trophy to prove it :)

    Looks like we may well spoil Wolves party. Shame :(
    Leicester were the best team in the league that year. Liverpool certainly are not the best team in the league this year. City are far superior. But, football can be a capricious mistress.
    Well in 7 games time, we will see.

    After our new form under Rogers, that last game of the season for Man City at home may not be the walkover that was expected.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,164
    _Anazina_ said:

    The big question is whether Utd will roll over on derby day to stop Liverpool winning the title. I think they might. A title for Liverpool is a living nightmare for Utd supporters. They can live with City winning it.

    Yes, it's not like Man Utd need the points, is it?
  • _Anazina__Anazina_ Posts: 1,810
    geoffw said:

    Fascinating article on how the EU and Ireland will manage the border if UK leaves without a deal.

    . . . It is rising concern that a ‘no deal’ might sooner or later become unavoidable that leads Europe’s two big political beasts to Mr Varadkar’s door to seek clarity on how the Irish border would be managed.

    Because a ‘no deal’ presents the EU with a political trilemma - balancing the need to show solidarity with Ireland, while supporting the Good Friday Agreement and ‘no hard border’, and protecting the integrity of the EU single market. . . .


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/03/30/leo-varadkar-hold-talks-angela-merkel-emmanuel-macron-reality/

    No deal ain’t happening.

    If you think No Deal is the outcome when a majority of MPs, the public, and the EU oppose it, I have a bridge to sell you.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,952
    _Anazina_ said:

    The big question is whether Utd will roll over on derby day to stop Liverpool winning the title. I think they might. A title for Liverpool is a living nightmare for Utd supporters. They can live with City winning it.

    Maybe. But United have to set about becoming the primary team in Manchester again. That requires City to start losing the title.....
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,956
    edited March 2019
    tlg86 said:

    _Anazina_ said:

    The big question is whether Utd will roll over on derby day to stop Liverpool winning the title. I think they might. A title for Liverpool is a living nightmare for Utd supporters. They can live with City winning it.

    Yes, it's not like Man Utd need the points, is it?
    Plus United fans do not want the treble equalled/superseded.
  • _Anazina__Anazina_ Posts: 1,810
    tlg86 said:

    _Anazina_ said:

    The big question is whether Utd will roll over on derby day to stop Liverpool winning the title. I think they might. A title for Liverpool is a living nightmare for Utd supporters. They can live with City winning it.

    Yes, it's not like Man Utd need the points, is it?
    They do. But still. I reckon most Utd fans would trade a CL place for Liverpool not winning the title!
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,708

    IanB2 said:

    The MPs seem to want to make this unnecessarily complicated. A permanent Customs Union is the obvious front runner and needs to be put back into the process. There's a question as to whether a referendum should be tied to it, producing a second option. The government needs to decide whether to throw May's deal into the mix for a quasi-MV4; if they do, there's a third option. If they are willing to subject this to a referendum as well, there's a possible fourth option. No deal and revoke probably have to stay in the process to give the people on each of the spectrum something to support before their preferences are transferred. So six in total, even if the government plays ball. Even if Labour's semi-unicorn has to stay in as the official opposition's first choice, that's only seven. Five if HMG doesn't want May's deal in the field.

    Surely that should be it?

    'A' permanent customs union will destroy a significant proportion of our non EU trade overnight.
    Deal plus Customs Union leads with Deltapoll today 36% for 29% against, as opposed to 45% opposed to No Deal 38% for, 37% opposed to EEA/EFTA 28% for and 36% opposed to the Malthouse compromise and 23% for.

    Revoke only leads 41% to 41% and EUref2 only leads 40% to 38% and Common Market 2.0 only leads 40% to 35% so all have lower leads than Deal plus Customs Union.


    Even Tory voters support Deal plus CU 42% to 27%, albeit more support No Deal

    http://www.deltapoll.co.uk/polls/brexit-conservatives
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,164
    _Anazina_ said:

    Foxy said:

    kle4 said:

    Thank you Hugo Lloris.

    Being a Liverpool fan is going to kill me.

    A Tory and Liverpool fan - a nervous time for you.

    I'm just hoping Liverpool are the Leicester of this year - clearly not the best team in the league, but squeak over the line nevertheless.

    The problem is the indicative votes process - which I support - needs to reach a result reasonably quickly to be credible. Dragging the process out is exactly the faint lifeline May needs to keep hanging on by her fingertips. The HoC coalescing around something quickly is important, not least because of the time pressures.

    Also some of these options are a bit...weird. I hope they make more sense on the order paper than in a tweet.

    Some of them do not

    https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmagenda/OP190401.pdf

    I'm irritated it is not even the plan to definitively settle it tomorrow. Given they had a first go last week, why couldn't they say that no matter what tomorrow they whittle them down to the final option? It adds to the question of what last week was even about.

    I really don't see why Bercow would call some of them again though, if they receive so few votes last time
    Leicester were the best team of the year, and we have trophy to prove it :)

    Looks like we may well spoil Wolves party. Shame :(
    Leicester were the best team in the league that year. Liverpool certainly are not the best team in the league this year. City are far superior. But, football can be a capricious mistress.
    I disagree. I think Spurs were the best side in 2015-16, they just didn't realise it until it was too late. In August 2015 they were happy to play out a 0-0 draw at home to Everton, for example.

  • 'A' permanent customs union will destroy a significant proportion of our non EU trade overnight.

    I don't think they know what they are voting for!

    Our non-EU trade is greater than our EU trade, too.

  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,262
    _Anazina_ said:

    The big question is whether Utd will roll over on derby day to stop Liverpool winning the title. I think they might. A title for Liverpool is a living nightmare for Utd supporters. They can live with City winning it.

    They won't roll over, they are still chasing a Champions League spot. They might well lose but that's a different matter.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,230
    A MP is paid £77k a year. They get further expenses to run an office and employ staff. They have a pension scheme and get their travel expenses paid and get help with accommodation costs.

    They really should be doing better than this... :(
  • _Anazina__Anazina_ Posts: 1,810
    tlg86 said:

    _Anazina_ said:

    Foxy said:

    kle4 said:

    Thank you Hugo Lloris.

    Being a Liverpool fan is going to kill me.

    A Tory and Liverpool fan - a nervous time for you.

    I'm just hoping Liverpool are the Leicester of this year - clearly not the best team in the league, but squeak over the line nevertheless.

    The problem is the indicative votes process - which I support - needs to reach a result reasonably quickly to be credible. Dragging the process out is exactly the faint lifeline May needs to keep hanging on by her fingertips. The HoC coalescing around something quickly is important, not least because of the time pressures.

    Also some of these options are a bit...weird. I hope they make more sense on the order paper than in a tweet.

    Some of them do not

    https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmagenda/OP190401.pdf

    I'm irritated it is not even the plan to definitively settle it tomorrow. Given they had a first go last week, why couldn't they say that no matter what tomorrow they whittle them down to the final option? It adds to the question of what last week was even about.

    I really don't see why Bercow would call some of them again though, if they receive so few votes last time
    Leicester were the best team of the year, and we have trophy to prove it :)

    Looks like we may well spoil Wolves party. Shame :(
    Leicester were the best team in the league that year. Liverpool certainly are not the best team in the league this year. City are far superior. But, football can be a capricious mistress.
    I disagree. I think Spurs were the best side in 2015-16, they just didn't realise it until it was too late. In August 2015 they were happy to play out a 0-0 draw at home to Everton, for example.
    I would love to agree, as my son supports them, and I support Forest. But they simply lacked the killer instinct. Leicester ground out wins very often by being unplayable on the counter attack, and were the better team overall.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950

    IanB2 said:

    The MPs seem to want to make this unnecessarily complicated. A permanent Customs Union is the obvious front runner and needs to be put back into the process. There's a question as to whether a referendum should be tied to it, producing a second option. The government needs to decide whether to throw May's deal into the mix for a quasi-MV4; if they do, there's a third option. If they are willing to subject this to a referendum as well, there's a possible fourth option. No deal and revoke probably have to stay in the process to give the people on each of the spectrum something to support before their preferences are transferred. So six in total, even if the government plays ball. Even if Labour's semi-unicorn has to stay in as the official opposition's first choice, that's only seven. Five if HMG doesn't want May's deal in the field.

    Surely that should be it?

    'A' permanent customs union will destroy a significant proportion of our non EU trade overnight.
    Presumably during the two years of our transition we would negotiate the requisite FTAs with those non EU trade partners.

    Go Liam.
  • _Anazina__Anazina_ Posts: 1,810

    tlg86 said:

    _Anazina_ said:

    The big question is whether Utd will roll over on derby day to stop Liverpool winning the title. I think they might. A title for Liverpool is a living nightmare for Utd supporters. They can live with City winning it.

    Yes, it's not like Man Utd need the points, is it?
    Plus United fans do not want the treble equalled/superseded.
    Still think they’d trade that to avoid a Scouser title.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981
    _Anazina_ said:

    geoffw said:

    Fascinating article on how the EU and Ireland will manage the border if UK leaves without a deal.

    . . . It is rising concern that a ‘no deal’ might sooner or later become unavoidable that leads Europe’s two big political beasts to Mr Varadkar’s door to seek clarity on how the Irish border would be managed.

    Because a ‘no deal’ presents the EU with a political trilemma - balancing the need to show solidarity with Ireland, while supporting the Good Friday Agreement and ‘no hard border’, and protecting the integrity of the EU single market. . . .


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/03/30/leo-varadkar-hold-talks-angela-merkel-emmanuel-macron-reality/

    No deal ain’t happening.

    If you think No Deal is the outcome when a majority of MPs, the public, and the EU oppose it, I have a bridge to sell you.
    The EU is increasingly reconciled to it, and the public and MPs are neither here nor there.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-47756377
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,708
    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    The MPs seem to want to make this unnecessarily complicated. A permanent Customs Union is the obvious front runner and needs to be put back into the process. There's a question as to whether a referendum should be tied to it, producing a second option. The government needs to decide whether to throw May's deal into the mix for a quasi-MV4; if they do, there's a third option. If they are willing to subject this to a referendum as well, there's a possible fourth option. No deal and revoke probably have to stay in the process to give the people on each of the spectrum something to support before their preferences are transferred. So six in total, even if the government plays ball. Even if Labour's semi-unicorn has to stay in as the official opposition's first choice, that's only seven. Five if HMG doesn't want May's deal in the field.

    Surely that should be it?

    'A' permanent customs union will destroy a significant proportion of our non EU trade overnight.
    Deal plus Customs Union leads with Deltapoll today 36% for 29% against, as opposed to 45% opposed to No Deal 38% for, 37% opposed to EEA/EFTA 28% for and 36% opposed to the Malthouse compromise and 23% for.

    Revoke only leads 41% to 40% and EUref2 only leads 40% to 38% and Common Market 2.0 only leads 40% to 35% so all have lower leads than Deal plus Customs Union.


    Even Tory voters support Deal plus CU 42% to 27%, albeit more support No Deal

    http://www.deltapoll.co.uk/polls/brexit-conservatives
    Revoke figure should be 41% to 40%, amended
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,839
    _Anazina_ said:

    tlg86 said:

    _Anazina_ said:

    Foxy said:

    kle4 said:

    Thank you Hugo Lloris.

    Being a Liverpool fan is going to kill me.

    A Tory and Liverpool fan - a nervous time for you.

    I'm just hoping Liverpool are the Leicester of this year - clearly not the best team in the league, but squeak over the line nevertheless.

    The problem is the indicative votes process - which I support - needs to reach a result reasonably quickly to be credible. Dragging the process out is exactly the faint lifeline May needs to keep hanging on by her fingertips. The HoC coalescing around something quickly is important, not least because of the time pressures.

    Also some of these options are a bit...weird. I hope they make more sense on the order paper than in a tweet.

    Some of them do not

    https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmagenda/OP190401.pdf

    I'm irritated it is not even the plan to definitively settle it tomorrow. Given they had a first go last week, why couldn't they say that no matter what tomorrow they whittle them down to the final option? It adds to the question of what last week was even about.

    I really don't see why Bercow would call some of them again though, if they receive so few votes last time
    Leicester were the best team of the year, and we have trophy to prove it :)

    Looks like we may well spoil Wolves party. Shame :(
    Leicester were the best team in the league that year. Liverpool certainly are not the best team in the league this year. City are far superior. But, football can be a capricious mistress.
    I disagree. I think Spurs were the best side in 2015-16, they just didn't realise it until it was too late. In August 2015 they were happy to play out a 0-0 draw at home to Everton, for example.
    I would love to agree, as my son supports them, and I support Forest. But they simply lacked the killer instinct. Leicester ground out wins very often by being unplayable on the counter attack, and were the better team overall.
    Goal difference can be taken as a proxy for how good teams are, but its not everything - by that measure England should have romped home in the 6 nations. The 10 odd points Leicester finished ahead of Spurs probably meant more than their superior GD.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    Ishmael_Z said:

    _Anazina_ said:

    geoffw said:

    Fascinating article on how the EU and Ireland will manage the border if UK leaves without a deal.

    . . . It is rising concern that a ‘no deal’ might sooner or later become unavoidable that leads Europe’s two big political beasts to Mr Varadkar’s door to seek clarity on how the Irish border would be managed.

    Because a ‘no deal’ presents the EU with a political trilemma - balancing the need to show solidarity with Ireland, while supporting the Good Friday Agreement and ‘no hard border’, and protecting the integrity of the EU single market. . . .


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/03/30/leo-varadkar-hold-talks-angela-merkel-emmanuel-macron-reality/

    No deal ain’t happening.

    If you think No Deal is the outcome when a majority of MPs, the public, and the EU oppose it, I have a bridge to sell you.
    The EU is increasingly reconciled to it, and the public and MPs are neither here nor there.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-47756377
    I'm both here and there about it. Plenty of MPs also. Not enough Cons MPs that said.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,839
    edited March 2019
    _Anazina_ said:

    tlg86 said:

    _Anazina_ said:

    The big question is whether Utd will roll over on derby day to stop Liverpool winning the title. I think they might. A title for Liverpool is a living nightmare for Utd supporters. They can live with City winning it.

    Yes, it's not like Man Utd need the points, is it?
    Plus United fans do not want the treble equalled/superseded.
    Still think they’d trade that to avoid a Scouser title.
    Wouldn't we all :D
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    This is an interesting write-up from the campaign for the Newport West by-election:

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/mar/31/newport-west-byelection-voters-look-away-from-main-parties-for-renewal

    How many saved deposits will there be?

    It wouldn't surprise me if there were still only two saved.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981
    TOPPING said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    _Anazina_ said:

    geoffw said:

    Fascinating article on how the EU and Ireland will manage the border if UK leaves without a deal.

    . . . It is rising concern that a ‘no deal’ might sooner or later become unavoidable that leads Europe’s two big political beasts to Mr Varadkar’s door to seek clarity on how the Irish border would be managed.

    Because a ‘no deal’ presents the EU with a political trilemma - balancing the need to show solidarity with Ireland, while supporting the Good Friday Agreement and ‘no hard border’, and protecting the integrity of the EU single market. . . .


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/03/30/leo-varadkar-hold-talks-angela-merkel-emmanuel-macron-reality/

    No deal ain’t happening.

    If you think No Deal is the outcome when a majority of MPs, the public, and the EU oppose it, I have a bridge to sell you.
    The EU is increasingly reconciled to it, and the public and MPs are neither here nor there.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-47756377
    I'm both here and there about it. Plenty of MPs also. Not enough Cons MPs that said.
    I am sure you are, but you might as well campaign to have the law of gravity repealed for all the good it will do, unless we can tell the EU what we *do* want, sharpish.
  • Mortimer said:
    The manifesto that saw the Tory party lose their majority?
  • _Anazina__Anazina_ Posts: 1,810
    Ishmael_Z said:

    _Anazina_ said:

    geoffw said:

    Fascinating article on how the EU and Ireland will manage the border if UK leaves without a deal.

    . . . It is rising concern that a ‘no deal’ might sooner or later become unavoidable that leads Europe’s two big political beasts to Mr Varadkar’s door to seek clarity on how the Irish border would be managed.

    Because a ‘no deal’ presents the EU with a political trilemma - balancing the need to show solidarity with Ireland, while supporting the Good Friday Agreement and ‘no hard border’, and protecting the integrity of the EU single market. . . .


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/03/30/leo-varadkar-hold-talks-angela-merkel-emmanuel-macron-reality/

    No deal ain’t happening.

    If you think No Deal is the outcome when a majority of MPs, the public, and the EU oppose it, I have a bridge to sell you.
    The EU is increasingly reconciled to it, and the public and MPs are neither here nor there.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-47756377
    Ain’t happening
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,921

    Mortimer said:
    The manifesto that saw the Tory party lose their majority?
    Yeh. The one he stood under as a candidate of The Conservative and Unionist Party.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,230
    Ishmael_Z said:

    TOPPING said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    _Anazina_ said:

    geoffw said:

    Fascinating article on how the EU and Ireland will manage the border if UK leaves without a deal.

    . . . It is rising concern that a ‘no deal’ might sooner or later become unavoidable that leads Europe’s two big political beasts to Mr Varadkar’s door to seek clarity on how the Irish border would be managed.

    Because a ‘no deal’ presents the EU with a political trilemma - balancing the need to show solidarity with Ireland, while supporting the Good Friday Agreement and ‘no hard border’, and protecting the integrity of the EU single market. . . .


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/03/30/leo-varadkar-hold-talks-angela-merkel-emmanuel-macron-reality/

    No deal ain’t happening.

    If you think No Deal is the outcome when a majority of MPs, the public, and the EU oppose it, I have a bridge to sell you.
    The EU is increasingly reconciled to it, and the public and MPs are neither here nor there.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-47756377
    I'm both here and there about it. Plenty of MPs also. Not enough Cons MPs that said.
    ...you might as well campaign to have the law of gravity repealed...
    Don't say that. The MPs will add it as Option H... :(

  • _Anazina__Anazina_ Posts: 1,810
    Pulpstar said:

    _Anazina_ said:

    tlg86 said:

    _Anazina_ said:

    The big question is whether Utd will roll over on derby day to stop Liverpool winning the title. I think they might. A title for Liverpool is a living nightmare for Utd supporters. They can live with City winning it.

    Yes, it's not like Man Utd need the points, is it?
    Plus United fans do not want the treble equalled/superseded.
    Still think they’d trade that to avoid a Scouser title.
    Wouldn't we all :D

    People say that, and I know what you mean (we’d never hear the end of it!). But City buying the league sticks in the craw and the pseudo-Scousers on here, who have no discernible connection with Merseyside, are clearly decent folk - Eagles, KLE4
  • _Anazina__Anazina_ Posts: 1,810
    Pulpstar said:

    _Anazina_ said:

    tlg86 said:

    _Anazina_ said:

    Foxy said:

    kle4 said:

    Thank you Hugo Lloris.

    Being a Liverpool fan is going to kill me.

    A Tory and Liverpool fan - a nervous time for you.

    I'm just hoping Liverpool are the Leicester of this year - clearly not the best team in the league, but squeak over the line nevertheless.

    The problem is the indicative votes process - which I support - needs to reach a result reasonably quickly to be credible. Dragging the process out is exactly the faint lifeline May needs to keep hanging on by her fingertips. The HoC coalescing around something quickly is important, not least because of the time pressures.

    Also some tof these options are a bit...weird. I hope they make more sense on the order paper than in a tweet.

    Some of them do not

    https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmagenda/OP190401.pdf

    I'm irritated it is not even the plan to definitively settle it tomorrow. Given they had a first go last week, why couldn't they say that no matter what tomorrow they whittle them down to the final option? It adds to the question of what last week was even about.

    I really don't see why Bercow would call some of them again though, if they receive so few votes last time
    Leicester were the best team of the year, and we have trophy to prove it :)

    Looks like we may well spoil Wolves party. Shame :(
    Leicester were the best team in the league that year. Liverpool certainly are not the best team in the league this year. City are far superior. But, football can be a capricious mistress.
    I disagree. I think Spurs were the best side in 2015-16, they just didn't realise it until it was too late. In August 2015 they were happy to play out a 0-0 draw at home to Everton, for example.
    I would love to agree, as my son supports them, and I support Forest. But they simply lacked the killer instinct. Leicester ground out wins very often by being unplayable on the counter attack, and were the better team overall.
    Goal difference can be taken as a proxy for how good teams are, but its not everything - by that measure England should have romped home in the 6 nations. The 10 odd points Leicester finished ahead of Spurs probably meant more than their superior GD.
    Exactly right - well expressed sir.
  • Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:
    The manifesto that saw the Tory party lose their majority?
    Yeh. The one he stood under as a candidate of The Conservative and Unionist Party.
    Bill Cash et al stood on a manifesto pledge to ratify the Maastricht Treaty.

    They repeatedly ignored that manifesto commitment until John Major had to make it a confidence matter.

    You are reaping what you sowed.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:
    The manifesto that saw the Tory party lose their majority?
    Yeh. The one he stood under as a candidate of The Conservative and Unionist Party.
    That's the one. The one the public rejected and which therefore became all but incidental to the current governing coalition.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,909

    Mortimer said:
    The manifesto that saw the Tory party lose their majority?
    Corbyn didn't get a majority either...
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    viewcode said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    TOPPING said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    _Anazina_ said:

    geoffw said:

    Fascinating article on how the EU and Ireland will manage the border if UK leaves without a deal.

    . . . It is rising concern that a ‘no deal’ might sooner or later become unavoidable that leads Europe’s two big political beasts to Mr Varadkar’s door to seek clarity on how the Irish border would be managed.

    Because a ‘no deal’ presents the EU with a political trilemma - balancing the need to show solidarity with Ireland, while supporting the Good Friday Agreement and ‘no hard border’, and protecting the integrity of the EU single market. . . .


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/03/30/leo-varadkar-hold-talks-angela-merkel-emmanuel-macron-reality/

    No deal ain’t happening.

    If you think No Deal is the outcome when a majority of MPs, the public, and the EU oppose it, I have a bridge to sell you.
    The EU is increasingly reconciled to it, and the public and MPs are neither here nor there.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-47756377
    I'm both here and there about it. Plenty of MPs also. Not enough Cons MPs that said.
    ...you might as well campaign to have the law of gravity repealed...
    Don't say that. The MPs will add it as Option H... :(

    LOL

    I have heard that gravity is nothing but a marxist/bourgeois concept delete as applicable., and so should be defeated.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,921
    edited March 2019

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:
    The manifesto that saw the Tory party lose their majority?
    Yeh. The one he stood under as a candidate of The Conservative and Unionist Party.
    Bill Cash et al stood on a manifesto pledge to ratify the Maastricht Treaty.

    They repeatedly ignored that manifesto commitment until John Major had to make it a confidence matter.

    You are reaping what you sowed.
    I was 5 in 1992...

    All Smith is doing is what Major did.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,262
  • _Anazina_ said:

    geoffw said:

    Fascinating article on how the EU and Ireland will manage the border if UK leaves without a deal.

    . . . It is rising concern that a ‘no deal’ might sooner or later become unavoidable that leads Europe’s two big political beasts to Mr Varadkar’s door to seek clarity on how the Irish border would be managed.

    Because a ‘no deal’ presents the EU with a political trilemma - balancing the need to show solidarity with Ireland, while supporting the Good Friday Agreement and ‘no hard border’, and protecting the integrity of the EU single market. . . .


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/03/30/leo-varadkar-hold-talks-angela-merkel-emmanuel-macron-reality/

    No deal ain’t happening.

    If you think No Deal is the outcome when a majority of MPs, the public, and the EU oppose it, I have a bridge to sell you.
    Unfortunately only the MPs have a say, and there is no majority for any other course of action.
    There may be a notional majority for "Common Market 2.0" but half of those would only vote for it if it came with a confirmatory vote, and the other half would only support it if it doesn't.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    TOPPING said:

    IanB2 said:

    The MPs seem to want to make this unnecessarily complicated. A permanent Customs Union is the obvious front runner and needs to be put back into the process. There's a question as to whether a referendum should be tied to it, producing a second option. The government needs to decide whether to throw May's deal into the mix for a quasi-MV4; if they do, there's a third option. If they are willing to subject this to a referendum as well, there's a possible fourth option. No deal and revoke probably have to stay in the process to give the people on each of the spectrum something to support before their preferences are transferred. So six in total, even if the government plays ball. Even if Labour's semi-unicorn has to stay in as the official opposition's first choice, that's only seven. Five if HMG doesn't want May's deal in the field.

    Surely that should be it?

    'A' permanent customs union will destroy a significant proportion of our non EU trade overnight.
    Presumably during the two years of our transition we would negotiate the requisite FTAs with those non EU trade partners.

    Go Liam.
    Why would they in "a" customs union they have access to our market anyway. The only way this works is if we're in "the" customs union
  • Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:
    The manifesto that saw the Tory party lose their majority?
    Yeh. The one he stood under as a candidate of The Conservative and Unionist Party.
    Bill Cash et al stood on a manifesto pledge to ratify the Maastricht Treaty.

    They repeatedly ignored that manifesto commitment until John Major had to make it a confidence matter.

    You are reaping what you sowed.
    I was 5 in 1992...
    Yet you moan about what the EC became in 1993.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    Ishmael_Z said:

    TOPPING said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    _Anazina_ said:

    geoffw said:

    Fascinating article on how the EU and Ireland will manage the border if UK leaves without a deal.

    . . . It is rising concern that a ‘no deal’ might sooner or later become unavoidable that leads Europe’s two big political beasts to Mr Varadkar’s door to seek clarity on how the Irish border would be managed.

    Because a ‘no deal’ presents the EU with a political trilemma - balancing the need to show solidarity with Ireland, while supporting the Good Friday Agreement and ‘no hard border’, and protecting the integrity of the EU single market. . . .


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/03/30/leo-varadkar-hold-talks-angela-merkel-emmanuel-macron-reality/

    No deal ain’t happening.

    If you think No Deal is the outcome when a majority of MPs, the public, and the EU oppose it, I have a bridge to sell you.
    The EU is increasingly reconciled to it, and the public and MPs are neither here nor there.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-47756377
    I'm both here and there about it. Plenty of MPs also. Not enough Cons MPs that said.
    I am sure you are, but you might as well campaign to have the law of gravity repealed for all the good it will do, unless we can tell the EU what we *do* want, sharpish.
    I was staring at the very apple tree only yesterday AAMOF.
  • _Anazina__Anazina_ Posts: 1,810
    Mortimer said:
    The one drawn up by a bunch of spotty schoolboy spods at Central Office that was rejected by the electorate? That one?
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,921
    TOPPING said:

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:
    The manifesto that saw the Tory party lose their majority?
    Yeh. The one he stood under as a candidate of The Conservative and Unionist Party.
    That's the one. The one the public rejected and which therefore became all but incidental to the current governing coalition.
    Not a coalition. Lol.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,262
    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:
    The manifesto that saw the Tory party lose their majority?
    Yeh. The one he stood under as a candidate of The Conservative and Unionist Party.
    Bill Cash et al stood on a manifesto pledge to ratify the Maastricht Treaty.

    They repeatedly ignored that manifesto commitment until John Major had to make it a confidence matter.

    You are reaping what you sowed.
    I was 5 in 1992...
    Bill Cash wasn't!
  • rural_voterrural_voter Posts: 2,038

    GIN1138 said:

    Scott_P said:
    I thought they voted for all of these last week and nothing passed?
    G is new
    G may be designed to be informed by the numbers signing the petitions:

    Leave with No Deal <600,000 after ?5 months
    https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/229963

    Revoke >6,000,000 after 2 weeks.
  • AmpfieldAndyAmpfieldAndy Posts: 1,445
    edited March 2019

    Mortimer said:
    The manifesto that saw the Tory party lose their majority?
    Of course fox hunting and social care and May’s inability to say anything except “strong and stable” didn’t cost any votes did they ? Of course it was all Brexit, on which Labour also campaigned on a Leave ticket.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    In theory the 'Mh' should always be 'V' in Gaelic, though a lot of Mhairis seem to go for Marree.

    I was at school with a Marree, and worked with a Varree
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,921
    edited March 2019

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:
    The manifesto that saw the Tory party lose their majority?
    Yeh. The one he stood under as a candidate of The Conservative and Unionist Party.
    Bill Cash et al stood on a manifesto pledge to ratify the Maastricht Treaty.

    They repeatedly ignored that manifesto commitment until John Major had to make it a confidence matter.

    You are reaping what you sowed.
    I was 5 in 1992...
    Yet you moan about what the EC became in 1993.
    Because it affects me today.

    I’m pointing out that I didn’t sow anything. The fools who didn’t listen to Maggie about getting consent for Maastricht sowed everything.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,262
    Mortimer said:

    TOPPING said:

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:
    The manifesto that saw the Tory party lose their majority?
    Yeh. The one he stood under as a candidate of The Conservative and Unionist Party.
    That's the one. The one the public rejected and which therefore became all but incidental to the current governing coalition.
    Not a coalition. Lol.
    A real coalition of chaos
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 15,542

    IanB2 said:

    The MPs seem to want to make this unnecessarily complicated. A permanent Customs Union is the obvious front runner and needs to be put back into the process. There's a question as to whether a referendum should be tied to it, producing a second option. The government needs to decide whether to throw May's deal into the mix for a quasi-MV4; if they do, there's a third option. If they are willing to subject this to a referendum as well, there's a possible fourth option. No deal and revoke probably have to stay in the process to give the people on each of the spectrum something to support before their preferences are transferred. So six in total, even if the government plays ball. Even if Labour's semi-unicorn has to stay in as the official opposition's first choice, that's only seven. Five if HMG doesn't want May's deal in the field.

    Surely that should be it?

    'A' permanent customs union will destroy a significant proportion of our non EU trade overnight.
    Less destruction than NOT being in the/a customs union however. We can't compare with membership of the European Union. Every Brexit outcome represents a downgrade. Staying in the customs union means a smaller downgrade overall.

    Good explainer here: https://twitter.com/SamuelMarcLowe/status/1112292385705390081
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,080
    _Anazina_ said:

    geoffw said:

    Fascinating article on how the EU and Ireland will manage the border if UK leaves without a deal.

    . . . It is rising concern that a ‘no deal’ might sooner or later become unavoidable that leads Europe’s two big political beasts to Mr Varadkar’s door to seek clarity on how the Irish border would be managed.

    Because a ‘no deal’ presents the EU with a political trilemma - balancing the need to show solidarity with Ireland, while supporting the Good Friday Agreement and ‘no hard border’, and protecting the integrity of the EU single market. . . .


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/03/30/leo-varadkar-hold-talks-angela-merkel-emmanuel-macron-reality/

    No deal ain’t happening.

    If you think No Deal is the outcome when a majority of MPs, the public, and the EU oppose it, I have a bridge to sell you.
    Yes. This BRA needs to end.
  • Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:
    The manifesto that saw the Tory party lose their majority?
    Yeh. The one he stood under as a candidate of The Conservative and Unionist Party.
    Bill Cash et al stood on a manifesto pledge to ratify the Maastricht Treaty.

    They repeatedly ignored that manifesto commitment until John Major had to make it a confidence matter.

    You are reaping what you sowed.
    I was 5 in 1992...
    Yet you moan about what the EC became in 1993.
    Because it affects me today.

    I’m pointing out that I didn’t sow anything. The fools who didn’t listen to Maggie about getting consent for Maastricht sowed everything.
    Bill Cash sowed the rebellions of today.
  • AmpfieldAndyAmpfieldAndy Posts: 1,445
    edited March 2019
    _Anazina_ said:

    Mortimer said:
    The one drawn up by a bunch of spotty schoolboy spods at Central Office that was rejected by the electorate? That one?
    “..spotty schoolboy spod...” is a bit harsh - even of Nick Timothy.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    IanB2 said:

    The MPs seem to want to make this unnecessarily complicated. A permanent Customs Union is the obvious front runner and needs to be put back into the process. There's a question as to whether a referendum should be tied to it, producing a second option. The government needs to decide whether to throw May's deal into the mix for a quasi-MV4; if they do, there's a third option. If they are willing to subject this to a referendum as well, there's a possible fourth option. No deal and revoke probably have to stay in the process to give the people on each of the spectrum something to support before their preferences are transferred. So six in total, even if the government plays ball. Even if Labour's semi-unicorn has to stay in as the official opposition's first choice, that's only seven. Five if HMG doesn't want May's deal in the field.

    Surely that should be it?

    'A' permanent customs union will destroy a significant proportion of our non EU trade overnight.
    Presumably during the two years of our transition we would negotiate the requisite FTAs with those non EU trade partners.

    Go Liam.
    Why would they in "a" customs union they have access to our market anyway. The only way this works is if we're in "the" customs union
    It is asymmetric if it is "a" customs union. Unless we have the accompanying FTAs. Otherwise we have to let goods in tariff free but our goods are subject to tariffs.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,230
    kle4 said:

    viewcode said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    TOPPING said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    _Anazina_ said:

    geoffw said:

    Fascinating article on how the EU and Ireland will manage the border if UK leaves without a deal.

    . . . It is rising concern that a ‘no deal’ might sooner or later become unavoidable that leads Europe’s two big political beasts to Mr Varadkar’s door to seek clarity on how the Irish border would be managed.

    Because a ‘no deal’ presents the EU with a political trilemma - balancing the need to show solidarity with Ireland, while supporting the Good Friday Agreement and ‘no hard border’, and protecting the integrity of the EU single market. . . .


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/03/30/leo-varadkar-hold-talks-angela-merkel-emmanuel-macron-reality/

    No deal ain’t happening.

    If you think No Deal is the outcome when a majority of MPs, the public, and the EU oppose it, I have a bridge to sell you.
    The EU is increasingly reconciled to it, and the public and MPs are neither here nor there.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-47756377
    I'm both here and there about it. Plenty of MPs also. Not enough Cons MPs that said.
    ...you might as well campaign to have the law of gravity repealed...
    Don't say that. The MPs will add it as Option H... :(

    LOL

    I have heard that gravity is nothing but a marxist/bourgeois concept delete as applicable., and so should be defeated.
    :)
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,952
    viewcode said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    TOPPING said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    _Anazina_ said:

    geoffw said:

    Fascinating article on how the EU and Ireland will manage the border if UK leaves without a deal.

    . . . It is rising concern that a ‘no deal’ might sooner or later become unavoidable that leads Europe’s two big political beasts to Mr Varadkar’s door to seek clarity on how the Irish border would be managed.

    Because a ‘no deal’ presents the EU with a political trilemma - balancing the need to show solidarity with Ireland, while supporting the Good Friday Agreement and ‘no hard border’, and protecting the integrity of the EU single market. . . .


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/03/30/leo-varadkar-hold-talks-angela-merkel-emmanuel-macron-reality/

    No deal ain’t happening.

    If you think No Deal is the outcome when a majority of MPs, the public, and the EU oppose it, I have a bridge to sell you.
    The EU is increasingly reconciled to it, and the public and MPs are neither here nor there.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-47756377
    I'm both here and there about it. Plenty of MPs also. Not enough Cons MPs that said.
    ...you might as well campaign to have the law of gravity repealed...
    Don't say that. The MPs will add it as Option H... :(

    No need. The current MPs already lack gravity.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    Mortimer said:

    TOPPING said:

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:
    The manifesto that saw the Tory party lose their majority?
    Yeh. The one he stood under as a candidate of The Conservative and Unionist Party.
    That's the one. The one the public rejected and which therefore became all but incidental to the current governing coalition.
    Not a coalition. Lol.
    Whatever it is the manifesto ceased to become binding after the majority was not won.
This discussion has been closed.