Labour’s deputy leader, Tom Watson, is urging colleagues to step back from the brink in challenging Jeremy Corbyn, warning that a leadership election in which the incumbent stands again could cause untold damage to the party.
Watson is seeking to organise a meeting with Corbyn’s closest advisers to try to agree a negotiated settlement that would see the Labour leader step down voluntarily, thus avoiding an acrimonious and drawn-out battle.
Bottlers. They took it to the brink and he did not blink, if they step back now they are declaring themselves beaten and should leave the party or serve Corbyn loyally from now.
Labour’s deputy leader, Tom Watson, is urging colleagues to step back from the brink in challenging Jeremy Corbyn, warning that a leadership election in which the incumbent stands again could cause untold damage to the party.
Watson is seeking to organise a meeting with Corbyn’s closest advisers to try to agree a negotiated settlement that would see the Labour leader step down voluntarily, thus avoiding an acrimonious and drawn-out battle.
Bottlers. They took it to the brink and he did not blink, if they step back now they are declaring themselves beaten and should leave the party or serve Corbyn loyally from now.
Nobody has bottled anything, pretty obvious we are going to get a leadership election.
Labour’s deputy leader, Tom Watson, is urging colleagues to step back from the brink in challenging Jeremy Corbyn, warning that a leadership election in which the incumbent stands again could cause untold damage to the party.
Watson is seeking to organise a meeting with Corbyn’s closest advisers to try to agree a negotiated settlement that would see the Labour leader step down voluntarily, thus avoiding an acrimonious and drawn-out battle.
Bottlers. They took it to the brink and he did not blink, if they step back now they are declaring themselves beaten and should leave the party or serve Corbyn loyally from now.
Nobody has bottled anything, pretty obvious we are going to get a leadership election.
Labour’s deputy leader, Tom Watson, is urging colleagues to step back from the brink in challenging Jeremy Corbyn, warning that a leadership election in which the incumbent stands again could cause untold damage to the party.
Watson is seeking to organise a meeting with Corbyn’s closest advisers to try to agree a negotiated settlement that would see the Labour leader step down voluntarily, thus avoiding an acrimonious and drawn-out battle.
This is one amazing slow motion car crash. Surely even Watson knows that Jeremy isn't resigning now - why go through everything that happened this week only to step down anyway?
Someone needs to actually make the challenge, but no-one dares be the one who splits the party by triggering the contest that sees Corbyn win again. The sensible wing of the PLP might as well all resign now, they're getting deselected anyway and don't have a spine between the lot of them!
Labour’s deputy leader, Tom Watson, is urging colleagues to step back from the brink in challenging Jeremy Corbyn, warning that a leadership election in which the incumbent stands again could cause untold damage to the party.
Watson is seeking to organise a meeting with Corbyn’s closest advisers to try to agree a negotiated settlement that would see the Labour leader step down voluntarily, thus avoiding an acrimonious and drawn-out battle.
Bottlers. They took it to the brink and he did not blink, if they step back now they are declaring themselves beaten and should leave the party or serve Corbyn loyally from now.
The Tories have given them a very public lesson on how to perform a ruthless defenestration.
Labour’s deputy leader, Tom Watson, is urging colleagues to step back from the brink in challenging Jeremy Corbyn, warning that a leadership election in which the incumbent stands again could cause untold damage to the party.
Watson is seeking to organise a meeting with Corbyn’s closest advisers to try to agree a negotiated settlement that would see the Labour leader step down voluntarily, thus avoiding an acrimonious and drawn-out battle.
Bottlers. They took it to the brink and he did not blink, if they step back now they are declaring themselves beaten and should leave the party or serve Corbyn loyally from now.
The Tories have given them a very public lesson on how to perform a ruthless defenestration.
When will Labour learn?
There is nothing good or admirable in the Tory election. Nothing you would wish to emulate.
One example of a possible change came in a poll of members of the Unite union carried out over the past three days. While the union still officially backs Corbyn – its general secretary, Len McCluskey, has said rebel MPs are betraying the party – the poll found that almost half of members believe Corbyn should step down immediately.
Of all Unite members polled, 49% said this should happen, with even 48% of those who said they voted Labour in 2015 agreeing. If there was a new leadership election, 44% of the Labour backers would oppose Corbyn, against 43% who would support him, the survey found.
The poll has a relatively low sample of 775, but makes for difficult reading for the Corbyn camp. Of Labour voters, 61% think Corbyn is doing badly in the job, and only 20% of them think he will ever become prime minister.
It is the £3 supporters who gave Corbyn his big lead, many of the union members backed Burnham or Cooper
Outstanding indeed - For a moving tribute, it's up there with the poppies at the Tower.
That is absolutely brilliant. Very well done indeed to whoever (very quietly) organised it.
I did my tour of the Somme last year,the Thiepval monument was closed in preparation for the remembrance ceremonies, but it was a very thought provoking tour. I am posting now from a "Thankful" village where I live occasionally, but my main residence is near one of a very few "Double Thankful" villages. The whole country was affected, the Pals brigades were horrific for the towns and villages.
Labour’s deputy leader, Tom Watson, is urging colleagues to step back from the brink in challenging Jeremy Corbyn, warning that a leadership election in which the incumbent stands again could cause untold damage to the party.
Watson is seeking to organise a meeting with Corbyn’s closest advisers to try to agree a negotiated settlement that would see the Labour leader step down voluntarily, thus avoiding an acrimonious and drawn-out battle.
Bottlers. They took it to the brink and he did not blink, if they step back now they are declaring themselves beaten and should leave the party or serve Corbyn loyally from now.
The Tories have given them a very public lesson on how to perform a ruthless defenestration.
When will Labour learn?
There is nothing good or admirable in the Tory election. Nothing you would wish to emulate.
We had a candidate who could win, but had huge doubts about him.
Labour goes out of their way to put him on the ballot, the Tories make sure he doesn't even get that close.
Labour’s deputy leader, Tom Watson, is urging colleagues to step back from the brink in challenging Jeremy Corbyn, warning that a leadership election in which the incumbent stands again could cause untold damage to the party.
Watson is seeking to organise a meeting with Corbyn’s closest advisers to try to agree a negotiated settlement that would see the Labour leader step down voluntarily, thus avoiding an acrimonious and drawn-out battle.
Bottlers. They took it to the brink and he did not blink, if they step back now they are declaring themselves beaten and should leave the party or serve Corbyn loyally from now.
The Tories have given them a very public lesson on how to perform a ruthless defenestration.
Hopefully Gove loses in the first or second round and Leadsom can be bought off leaving May and Crabb standing, then hopefully he bows out for a promotion.
May 94 .. Crabb 22 .. Gove 18 .. Leadsom 18 .. Fox 7
As posted earlier it is time for the party to elect Teresa unopposed and get on running the Country.
Agreed. Time to stop this nonsense.
A coronation is hardly a democratic debate.
Methinks the May supporters are a little too afraid of an open contest. Upstarts can be surprisingly popular....
If it goes to a membership ballot May vs A Leaver have to spend two months having a public debate about what renegotiation will look like. We just can't have that. We need a PM and we need one with some room for manoeuvre. This is a very, very dangerous situation.
Hopefully Gove loses in the first or second round and Leadsom can be bought off leaving May and Crabb standing, then hopefully he bows out for a promotion.
I really hate the idea of a coronation, especially on the Tory side.
May 94 .. Crabb 22 .. Gove 18 .. Leadsom 18 .. Fox 7
As posted earlier it is time for the party to elect Teresa unopposed and get on running the Country.
Agreed. Time to stop this nonsense.
A coronation is hardly a democratic debate.
Methinks the May supporters are a little too afraid of an open contest. Upstarts can be surprisingly popular....
If it goes to a membership ballot May vs A Leaver have to spend two months having a public debate about what renegotiation will look like. We just can't have that. We need a PM and we need one with some room for manoeuvre. This is a very, very dangerous situation.
Indeed. God forbid we actually talk about what type of Leave we want. In public. Ye Gods!
Labour’s deputy leader, Tom Watson, is urging colleagues to step back from the brink in challenging Jeremy Corbyn, warning that a leadership election in which the incumbent stands again could cause untold damage to the party.
Watson is seeking to organise a meeting with Corbyn’s closest advisers to try to agree a negotiated settlement that would see the Labour leader step down voluntarily, thus avoiding an acrimonious and drawn-out battle.
Bottlers. They took it to the brink and he did not blink, if they step back now they are declaring themselves beaten and should leave the party or serve Corbyn loyally from now.
The Tories have given them a very public lesson on how to perform a ruthless defenestration.
When will Labour learn?
There is nothing good or admirable in the Tory election. Nothing you would wish to emulate.
We had a candidate who could win, but had huge doubts about him.
Labour goes out of their way to put him on the ballot, the Tories make sure he doesn't even get that close.
Ask Ma Beckett.
Also at least the Labour party haven't subjected the country to a daft referendum.
Going for EEA/EFTA will keep UKIP relevant. One of the main reasons that it's a bad idea.
Giving UKIP a few more votes is a small price to pay for keeping the City and the economy going
Exactly right. As always, I will say that mass immigration is something we can solve at home with supply side reforms. We just need a government with the courage to do it.
One example of a possible change came in a poll of members of the Unite union carried out over the past three days. While the union still officially backs Corbyn – its general secretary, Len McCluskey, has said rebel MPs are betraying the party – the poll found that almost half of members believe Corbyn should step down immediately.
Of all Unite members polled, 49% said this should happen, with even 48% of those who said they voted Labour in 2015 agreeing. If there was a new leadership election, 44% of the Labour backers would oppose Corbyn, against 43% who would support him, the survey found.
The poll has a relatively low sample of 775, but makes for difficult reading for the Corbyn camp. Of Labour voters, 61% think Corbyn is doing badly in the job, and only 20% of them think he will ever become prime minister.
It is the £3 supporters who gave Corbyn his big lead, many of the union members backed Burnham or Cooper
He got 57% of the union vote last year, so we are looking at swingback here.
The point about coronations is just as true for the Conservative party as for the Labour party. Any leader who is appointed will have much less authority than one who has won in combat.
And this time in particular, ideas need to be tested and argued. The new leader will need a mandate for her position on Brexit. With such an exiguous majority, she will not be able to afford to give even a handful of dissidents the excuse to argue that the party has never decided the policy position.
Labour’s deputy leader, Tom Watson, is urging colleagues to step back from the brink in challenging Jeremy Corbyn, warning that a leadership election in which the incumbent stands again could cause untold damage to the party.
Watson is seeking to organise a meeting with Corbyn’s closest advisers to try to agree a negotiated settlement that would see the Labour leader step down voluntarily, thus avoiding an acrimonious and drawn-out battle.
Bottlers. They took it to the brink and he did not blink, if they step back now they are declaring themselves beaten and should leave the party or serve Corbyn loyally from now.
The Tories have given them a very public lesson on how to perform a ruthless defenestration.
When will Labour learn?
There is nothing good or admirable in the Tory election. Nothing you would wish to emulate.
We had a candidate who could win, but had huge doubts about him.
Labour goes out of their way to put him on the ballot, the Tories make sure he doesn't even get that close.
Nah. It lacked integrity and that matters. There is always a better way. Both parties struggling to find it.
Labour’s deputy leader, Tom Watson, is urging colleagues to step back from the brink in challenging Jeremy Corbyn, warning that a leadership election in which the incumbent stands again could cause untold damage to the party.
Watson is seeking to organise a meeting with Corbyn’s closest advisers to try to agree a negotiated settlement that would see the Labour leader step down voluntarily, thus avoiding an acrimonious and drawn-out battle.
This is one amazing slow motion car crash. Surely even Watson knows that Jeremy isn't resigning now - why go through everything that happened this week only to step down anyway?
Someone needs to actually make the challenge, but no-one dares be the one who splits the party by triggering the contest that sees Corbyn win again. The sensible wing of the PLP might as well all resign now, they're getting deselected anyway and don't have a spine between the lot of them!
Surely this is all positioning. Watson as the reasonable person trying to broker peace, and of course as Deputy all set for being acting Leader in the event of a resignation. This would also put him in pole position as a reluctant unifiyer for the Leadership contest afterwards.
May 94 .. Crabb 22 .. Gove 18 .. Leadsom 18 .. Fox 7
As posted earlier it is time for the party to elect Teresa unopposed and get on running the Country.
Agreed. Time to stop this nonsense.
A coronation is hardly a democratic debate.
Methinks the May supporters are a little too afraid of an open contest. Upstarts can be surprisingly popular....
If it goes to a membership ballot May vs A Leaver have to spend two months having a public debate about what renegotiation will look like. We just can't have that. We need a PM and we need one with some room for manoeuvre. This is a very, very dangerous situation.
Indeed. God forbid we actually talk about what type of Leave we want. In public. Ye Gods!
Lets get in the EEA and then discuss what we want our out to look like in the long term. I'm not alarmist by nature, but the uncertainty of our single market status will begin to cause damage soon. We need the issue resolved and May is the only one who will do it in the immediacy (Crabb too, but he won't win).
We had a referendum to leave the EU. It is only the anti-democrats like FF43 who seem to want to ignore it.
The polls (for what they are worth) both before and after the vote have shown a clear majority in favour of maintaining access to the single market even if it means maintaining freedom of movement. If you want to align yourself with the minority who see immigration as the most important issue feel free. The rest of us will continue to press for what has always been by far the most sensible arrangement which is EFTA/EEA membership.
The problem is that the Vote Leave campaign - the side which won, and which you and other Leavers supported - used immigration as their principal argument. Indeed, not only did they make heavy use of it, they even invented some absolute grade-A solid-gold nonsensical scaremongering about Turkey to embellish it. Perhaps they were lying in the most cynical way imaginable. I'll leave that question to the conscience of those who were happy to go along with their campaign.
I've asked before: can anyone show official literature (e.g. leaflets) from either leave campaign that mentioned either EEA or EFTA?
I can't remember any (but that's not saying much).
Does it matter? The people voted to leave the EU. Anything more than that and they can ask for it in another referendum. The leave campaign isn't the government and the next PM (Theresa) will have had little to do with it. This concern trolling from both you and Richard is tiresome. Only half of the leave vote was motivated by immigration, the rest was for a variety of reasons, two of which were having control over our laws and regaining sovereignty.
"Does it matter?"
Yes it does. A classic bait-and-switch by politicians after this referendum will not be taken well by the voters.
Your assumptions on why people voted leave are based (if at all) on polling that has already been widely discredited by the referendum itself. You cannot know with any certainty why people voted the way they did: all we have is what the leave campaigns said.
I am not 'concern trolling'. In a similar spirit: people who promoted the leave campaigns whilst they really wanted EEA or EFTA are just shyster conmen who were cynically taking the public for a ride. Bait-and-switch on an entire population.
To use the language above: only anti-democrats will want to ignore what the leave campaigns had as their core messages.
"Who will be the first Conservative Party leadership contender to be eliminated from the Conservative leadership contest as a result of the first ballot of Conservative MPs scheduled for Tuesday 5th July? At the scheduled start of the MPs ballot, this market will be turned in play with unmatched bets cancelled. Thereafter unmatched bets will not be cancelled by Betfair at any time. Should the eliminated MP be anyone other than the listed runners, this market will be declared void. Users should be aware they are NOT allowed to bet on this event if they are physically present in Austria."
I think betfair have copied that last sentence across wrong.
May 94 .. Crabb 22 .. Gove 18 .. Leadsom 18 .. Fox 7
As posted earlier it is time for the party to elect Teresa unopposed and get on running the Country.
Agreed. Time to stop this nonsense.
A coronation is hardly a democratic debate.
Methinks the May supporters are a little too afraid of an open contest. Upstarts can be surprisingly popular....
If it goes to a membership ballot May vs A Leaver have to spend two months having a public debate about what renegotiation will look like. We just can't have that. We need a PM and we need one with some room for manoeuvre. This is a very, very dangerous situation.
Indeed. God forbid we actually talk about what type of Leave we want. In public. Ye Gods!
Lets get in the EEA and then discuss what we want our out to look like in the long term. I'm not alarmist by nature, but the uncertainty of our single market status will begin to cause damage soon. We need the issue resolved and May is the only one who will do it in the immediacy (Crabb too, but he won't win).
I don't see the rush - it is not as if we've triggered article 50.
I was initially of the same mind Max - but now see the benefit of having a 2 month cooling off period in which Europe gets itchy feet and starts to wonder out loud if we can be pro cake and pro eating it.
The new leader will need a mandate for her position on Brexit. With such an exiguous majority, she will not be able to afford to give even a handful of dissidents the excuse to argue that the party has never decided the policy position.
Nothing is going to need a vote in parliament. Article 50 can be triggered by the PM, then the clock runs down. It will either be the negotiated deal, or WTO terms.
The point about coronations is just as true for the Conservative party as for the Labour party. Any leader who is appointed will have much less authority than one who has won in combat.
And this time in particular, ideas need to be tested and argued. The new leader will need a mandate for her position on Brexit. With such an exiguous majority, she will not be able to afford to give even a handful of dissidents the excuse to argue that the party has never decided the policy position.
I'm going to have to get an 'I agree with Alastair' t-shirt made...
The point about coronations is just as true for the Conservative party as for the Labour party. Any leader who is appointed will have much less authority than one who has won in combat.
And this time in particular, ideas need to be tested and argued. The new leader will need a mandate for her position on Brexit. With such an exiguous majority, she will not be able to afford to give even a handful of dissidents the excuse to argue that the party has never decided the policy position.
Yes it does. A classic bait-and-switch by politicians after this referendum will not be taken well by the voters.
Your assumptions on why people voted leave are based (if at all) on polling that has already been widely discredited by the referendum itself. You cannot know with any certainty why people voted the way they did: all we have is what the leave campaigns said.
I am not 'concern trolling'. In a similar spirit: people who promoted the leave campaigns whilst they really wanted EEA or EFTA are just shyster conmen who were cynically taking the public for a ride. Bait-and-switch on an entire population.
To use the language above: only anti-democrats will want to ignore what the leave campaigns had as their core messages.
The referendum question was "Should the UK remain or leave the EU?"
"Remain" "Leave"
It was not "Should the UK stop EU immigration?"
If those who think they've been wronged want to then vote for UKIP and try and force a second referendum, that is their right, but as of now the government has a mandate only to leave the EU. I might remind you that 48% voted to remain in the EU and the single market. There must be a compromise so that the 48% aren't completely ignored, 17m vs 16m is not a landslide.
He stressed he “did not want” to be Prime Minister, adding: “Whatever charisma is I don’t have it, whatever glamour may be I don’t think anyone could ever associate me with it.”
What a mess! - I'll give him two days, maximum, before he quits. His political career is over however you look at it, a complete self-destruct job.
Unless this is all a "put up job" from himself and Boris to ensure Theresa goes through unopposed.
Yesterday's events were very, very odd and I'd not be at all surprised if they are paving the way for May.
May 94 .. Crabb 22 .. Gove 18 .. Leadsom 18 .. Fox 7
As posted earlier it is time for the party to elect Teresa unopposed and get on running the Country.
Agreed. Time to stop this nonsense.
A coronation is hardly a democratic debate.
Methinks the May supporters are a little too afraid of an open contest. Upstarts can be surprisingly popular....
If it goes to a membership ballot May vs A Leaver have to spend two months having a public debate about what renegotiation will look like. We just can't have that. We need a PM and we need one with some room for manoeuvre. This is a very, very dangerous situation.
Indeed. God forbid we actually talk about what type of Leave we want. In public. Ye Gods!
Lets get in the EEA and then discuss what we want our out to look like in the long term. I'm not alarmist by nature, but the uncertainty of our single market status will begin to cause damage soon. We need the issue resolved and May is the only one who will do it in the immediacy (Crabb too, but he won't win).
I don't see the rush - it is not as if we've triggered article 50.
I was initially of the same mind Max - but now see the benefit of having a 2 month cooling off period in which Europe gets itchy feet and starts to wonder out loud if we can be pro cake and pro eating it.
The price will be passporting rights. It's not an offer we want on the table because the PM will be forced to consider it and banker popularity is not exactly high.
Yes it does. A classic bait-and-switch by politicians after this referendum will not be taken well by the voters.
Your assumptions on why people voted leave are based (if at all) on polling that has already been widely discredited by the referendum itself. You cannot know with any certainty why people voted the way they did: all we have is what the leave campaigns said.
I am not 'concern trolling'. In a similar spirit: people who promoted the leave campaigns whilst they really wanted EEA or EFTA are just shyster conmen who were cynically taking the public for a ride. Bait-and-switch on an entire population.
To use the language above: only anti-democrats will want to ignore what the leave campaigns had as their core messages.
The referendum question was "Should the UK remain or leave the EU?"
"Remain" "Leave"
It was not "Should the UK stop EU immigration?"
If those who think they've been wronged want to then vote for UKIP and try and force a second referendum, that is their right, but as of now the government has a mandate only to leave the EU. I might remind you that 48% voted to remain in the EU and the single market. There must be a compromise so that the 48% aren't completely ignored, 17m vs 16m is not a landslide.
Agreed - but 17m is more than have ever voted for any single party/thing in the UK.
Leaving the EU is popular - the desires of the 52% should not be forgotten either.
The new leader will need a mandate for her position on Brexit. With such an exiguous majority, she will not be able to afford to give even a handful of dissidents the excuse to argue that the party has never decided the policy position.
Nothing is going to need a vote in parliament. Article 50 can be triggered by the PM, then the clock runs down. It will either be the negotiated deal, or WTO terms.
Well there's a topic for discussion all by itself. There are quite a few QCs who disagree with your opening sentence, including David Pannick:
Labour’s deputy leader, Tom Watson, is urging colleagues to step back from the brink in challenging Jeremy Corbyn, warning that a leadership election in which the incumbent stands again could cause untold damage to the party.
Watson is seeking to organise a meeting with Corbyn’s closest advisers to try to agree a negotiated settlement that would see the Labour leader step down voluntarily, thus avoiding an acrimonious and drawn-out battle.
This is one amazing slow motion car crash. Surely even Watson knows that Jeremy isn't resigning now - why go through everything that happened this week only to step down anyway?
Someone needs to actually make the challenge, but no-one dares be the one who splits the party by triggering the contest that sees Corbyn win again. The sensible wing of the PLP might as well all resign now, they're getting deselected anyway and don't have a spine between the lot of them!
He might be doing a Juncker - needs to show that he's trying to make both sides see reason, thereby acting as the mediator and bridge builder the party needs.
With the declarations at 94 Theresa + 22 Crabb and the likelyhood most of those would go to Theresa it is to be hoped that wise heads in the party put the National interest first and nominate Theresa unopposed so that we can have a cabinet and government in place by the end of this month. Would be well received by the Country and the markets. The nonsense that has been going on needs to be put behind us
Hear, hear.
Yep, get on with it. If she has a commanding lead she's obviously going to win, this is not the time for three months of enjoyable dicking about.
Unopposed, what in all f**k? What is WRONG with you people?
He stressed he “did not want” to be Prime Minister, adding: “Whatever charisma is I don’t have it, whatever glamour may be I don’t think anyone could ever associate me with it.”
What a mess! - I'll give him two days, maximum, before he quits. His political career is over however you look at it, a complete self-destruct job.
Unless this is all a "put up job" from himself and Boris to ensure Theresa goes through unopposed.
Yesterday's events were very, very odd and I'd not be at all surprised if they are paving the way for May.
It's odd, but I think you're overthinking it. Mr Gove may well have been plotting to stuff Boris, but he's put himself forward, not backed Ms May.
Yes it does. A classic bait-and-switch by politicians after this referendum will not be taken well by the voters.
Your assumptions on why people voted leave are based (if at all) on polling that has already been widely discredited by the referendum itself. You cannot know with any certainty why people voted the way they did: all we have is what the leave campaigns said.
I am not 'concern trolling'. In a similar spirit: people who promoted the leave campaigns whilst they really wanted EEA or EFTA are just shyster conmen who were cynically taking the public for a ride. Bait-and-switch on an entire population.
To use the language above: only anti-democrats will want to ignore what the leave campaigns had as their core messages.
The referendum question was "Should the UK remain or leave the EU?"
"Remain" "Leave"
It was not "Should the UK stop EU immigration?"
If those who think they've been wronged want to then vote for UKIP and try and force a second referendum, that is their right, but as of now the government has a mandate only to leave the EU. I might remind you that 48% voted to remain in the EU and the single market. There must be a compromise so that the 48% aren't completely ignored, 17m vs 16m is not a landslide.
Agreed - but 17m is more than have ever voted for any single party/thing in the UK.
Leaving the EU is popular - the desires of the 52% should not be forgotten either.
Absolutely and by leaving the EU we would be leaving the EU. No one, especially not me, is suggesting we shouldn't leave the EU. I voted to leave, I just don't think we should be throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
May 94 .. Crabb 22 .. Gove 18 .. Leadsom 18 .. Fox 7
As posted earlier it is time for the party to elect Teresa unopposed and get on running the Country.
Agreed. Time to stop this nonsense.
A coronation is hardly a democratic debate.
Methinks the May supporters are a little too afraid of an open contest. Upstarts can be surprisingly popular....
If it goes to a membership ballot May vs A Leaver have to spend two months having a public debate about what renegotiation will look like. We just can't have that. We need a PM and we need one with some room for manoeuvre. This is a very, very dangerous situation.
Indeed. God forbid we actually talk about what type of Leave we want. In public. Ye Gods!
Lets get in the EEA and then discuss what we want our out to look like in the long term. I'm not alarmist by nature, but the uncertainty of our single market status will begin to cause damage soon. We need the issue resolved and May is the only one who will do it in the immediacy (Crabb too, but he won't win).
I don't see the rush - it is not as if we've triggered article 50.
I was initially of the same mind Max - but now see the benefit of having a 2 month cooling off period in which Europe gets itchy feet and starts to wonder out loud if we can be pro cake and pro eating it.
The price will be passporting rights. It's not an offer we want on the table because the PM will be forced to consider it and banker popularity is not exactly high.
Sounds to me like an offer we might want to consider....?
May 94 .. Crabb 22 .. Gove 18 .. Leadsom 18 .. Fox 7
As posted earlier it is time for the party to elect Teresa unopposed and get on running the Country.
Agreed. Time to stop this nonsense.
A coronation is hardly a democratic debate.
Methinks the May supporters are a little too afraid of an open contest. Upstarts can be surprisingly popular....
If it goes to a membership ballot May vs A Leaver have to spend two months having a public debate about what renegotiation will look like. We just can't have that. We need a PM and we need one with some room for manoeuvre. This is a very, very dangerous situation.
Indeed. God forbid we actually talk about what type of Leave we want. In public. Ye Gods!
Lets get in the EEA and then discuss what we want our out to look like in the long term. I'm not alarmist by nature, but the uncertainty of our single market status will begin to cause damage soon. We need the issue resolved and May is the only one who will do it in the immediacy (Crabb too, but he won't win).
Being the bull in the EEA chinashop with the explicit intention of walking out when the crockery is smashed is the way to piss off the EEA as much as the EU. Not wise.
If we join the EEA then it should be explicitly for the long term.
May 94 .. Crabb 22 .. Gove 18 .. Leadsom 18 .. Fox 7
As posted earlier it is time for the party to elect Teresa unopposed and get on running the Country.
Agreed. Time to stop this nonsense.
A coronation is hardly a democratic debate.
Methinks the May supporters are a little too afraid of an open contest. Upstarts can be surprisingly popular....
Not at all - the interest of the Country comes first and once further rounds have taken place and it becomes obvious prolonging the decision is pointless, then that is the time an accommodation must be made to give us a government asap
Yes it does. A classic bait-and-switch by politicians after this referendum will not be taken well by the voters.
Your assumptions on why people voted leave are based (if at all) on polling that has already been widely discredited by the referendum itself. You cannot know with any certainty why people voted the way they did: all we have is what the leave campaigns said.
I am not 'concern trolling'. In a similar spirit: people who promoted the leave campaigns whilst they really wanted EEA or EFTA are just shyster conmen who were cynically taking the public for a ride. Bait-and-switch on an entire population.
To use the language above: only anti-democrats will want to ignore what the leave campaigns had as their core messages.
The referendum question was "Should the UK remain or leave the EU?"
"Remain" "Leave"
It was not "Should the UK stop EU immigration?"
If those who think they've been wronged want to then vote for UKIP and try and force a second referendum, that is their right, but as of now the government has a mandate only to leave the EU. I might remind you that 48% voted to remain in the EU and the single market. There must be a compromise so that the 48% aren't completely ignored, 17m vs 16m is not a landslide.
Agreed - but 17m is more than have ever voted for any single party/thing in the UK.
Leaving the EU is popular - the desires of the 52% should not be forgotten either.
Absolutely and by leaving the EU we would be leaving the EU. No one, especially not me, is suggesting we shouldn't leave the EU. I voted to leave, I just don't think we should be throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Thing is - an awful lot of people want to leave the EU to end freedom of movement of labour....
The new leader will need a mandate for her position on Brexit. With such an exiguous majority, she will not be able to afford to give even a handful of dissidents the excuse to argue that the party has never decided the policy position.
Nothing is going to need a vote in parliament. Article 50 can be triggered by the PM, then the clock runs down. It will either be the negotiated deal, or WTO terms.
Well there's a topic for discussion all by itself. There are quite a few QCs who disagree with your opening sentence, including David Pannick:
Yes it does. A classic bait-and-switch by politicians after this referendum will not be taken well by the voters.
Your assumptions on why people voted leave are based (if at all) on polling that has already been widely discredited by the referendum itself. You cannot know with any certainty why people voted the way they did: all we have is what the leave campaigns said.
I am not 'concern trolling'. In a similar spirit: people who promoted the leave campaigns whilst they really wanted EEA or EFTA are just shyster conmen who were cynically taking the public for a ride. Bait-and-switch on an entire population.
To use the language above: only anti-democrats will want to ignore what the leave campaigns had as their core messages.
The referendum question was "Should the UK remain or leave the EU?"
"Remain" "Leave"
It was not "Should the UK stop EU immigration?"
If those who think they've been wronged want to then vote for UKIP and try and force a second referendum, that is their right, but as of now the government has a mandate only to leave the EU. I might remind you that 48% voted to remain in the EU and the single market. There must be a compromise so that the 48% aren't completely ignored, 17m vs 16m is not a landslide.
Well said. I am one of the 48%, we need a rapid solution to the unfolding loss of confidence in the Uk.
Going for EEA/EFTA will keep UKIP relevant. One of the main reasons that it's a bad idea.
Giving UKIP a few more votes is a small price to pay for keeping the City and the economy going
Exactly right. As always, I will say that mass immigration is something we can solve at home with supply side reforms. We just need a government with the courage to do it.
Gove has completely ****ed Leave here hasn't he? OK Boris would have lost to May in a run off but he would had a seat at the top table afterwards and had some influence. Gove as well. Now all that is gone, Gove won't make the final two, the negotiations will be handled by continuity Cameron/Osborne.
The point about coronations is just as true for the Conservative party as for the Labour party. Any leader who is appointed will have much less authority than one who has won in combat.
And this time in particular, ideas need to be tested and argued. The new leader will need a mandate for her position on Brexit. With such an exiguous majority, she will not be able to afford to give even a handful of dissidents the excuse to argue that the party has never decided the policy position.
Yep - definitely should be a contest !
Yes, there should be a contest: one round. If she's way ahead then what's the point in round 2?
Alternatively bring forward round 2 to the following week.... i see no reason, as the country wobbles, to wait ten languid weeks over the summer. Ridiculous
Because there are two different contests. The MPs select 2 candidates, the membership pick the winner.
Yes it does. A classic bait-and-switch by politicians after this referendum will not be taken well by the voters.
Your assumptions on why people voted leave are based (if at all) on polling that has already been widely discredited by the referendum itself. You cannot know with any certainty why people voted the way they did: all we have is what the leave campaigns said.
I am not 'concern trolling'. In a similar spirit: people who promoted the leave campaigns whilst they really wanted EEA or EFTA are just shyster conmen who were cynically taking the public for a ride. Bait-and-switch on an entire population.
To use the language above: only anti-democrats will want to ignore what the leave campaigns had as their core messages.
The referendum question was "Should the UK remain or leave the EU?"
"Remain" "Leave"
It was not "Should the UK stop EU immigration?"
If those who think they've been wronged want to then vote for UKIP and try and force a second referendum, that is their right, but as of now the government has a mandate only to leave the EU. I might remind you that 48% voted to remain in the EU and the single market. There must be a compromise so that the 48% aren't completely ignored, 17m vs 16m is not a landslide.
Well said. I am one of the 48%, we need a rapid solution to the unfolding loss of confidence in the Uk.
Unfolding loss of confidence?
I'm not seeing that at all - especially not in exports ;-)
May 94 .. Crabb 22 .. Gove 18 .. Leadsom 18 .. Fox 7
As posted earlier it is time for the party to elect Teresa unopposed and get on running the Country.
Agreed. Time to stop this nonsense.
A coronation is hardly a democratic debate.
Methinks the May supporters are a little too afraid of an open contest. Upstarts can be surprisingly popular....
If it goes to a membership ballot May vs A Leaver have to spend two months having a public debate about what renegotiation will look like. We just can't have that. We need a PM and we need one with some room for manoeuvre. This is a very, very dangerous situation.
Indeed. God forbid we actually talk about what type of Leave we want. In public. Ye Gods!
Lets get in the EEA and then discuss what we want our out to look like in the long term. I'm not alarmist by nature, but the uncertainty of our single market status will begin to cause damage soon. We need the issue resolved and May is the only one who will do it in the immediacy (Crabb too, but he won't win).
Being the bull in the EEA chinashop with the explicit intention of walking out when the crockery is smashed is the way to piss off the EEA as much as the EU. Not wise.
If we join the EEA then it should be explicitly for the long term.
I agree with that, I don't think the EEA is a stopgap measure, at least unless the EU wants to offer us a different and slightly better trade deal in the long term with extra voting rights or something along those lines. I just don't think two years is a long enough timeframe to mitigate the damage that would be done by going single market -> WTO.
Do the Aussies have shy Tories? If so, it looks very much like a coalition win.
For Malcolm Turnbull? Probably not, he is basically a centre-right David Miliband but does look like a very narrow Coalition win yes, though Turnbull could still lose his majority
The point about coronations is just as true for the Conservative party as for the Labour party. Any leader who is appointed will have much less authority than one who has won in combat.
And this time in particular, ideas need to be tested and argued. The new leader will need a mandate for her position on Brexit. With such an exiguous majority, she will not be able to afford to give even a handful of dissidents the excuse to argue that the party has never decided the policy position.
Yep - definitely should be a contest !
Yes, there should be a contest: one round. If she's way ahead then what's the point in round 2?
Alternatively bring forward round 2 to the following week.... i see no reason, as the country wobbles, to wait ten languid weeks over the summer. Ridiculous
I have no idea why the members contest takes so much longer than the MPs contest, this is true.
With the declarations at 94 Theresa + 22 Crabb and the likelyhood most of those would go to Theresa it is to be hoped that wise heads in the party put the National interest first and nominate Theresa unopposed so that we can have a cabinet and government in place by the end of this month. Would be well received by the Country and the markets. The nonsense that has been going on needs to be put behind us
Hear, hear.
Yep, get on with it. If she has a commanding lead she's obviously going to win, this is not the time for three months of enjoyable dicking about.
Unopposed, what in all f**k? What is WRONG with you people?
See my other post. I mean just have one round and if she's way ahead (surely she will be) then that's good enough, the others should withdraw.
The only real rival was Boris, and now he's gone. None of the others have a chance, I don't think.
Wait and see. The PCP rarely agree wholeheartedly on anything...
OK. Let's force May to spend all of July and August negotiating Brexit in public with her opponent and Tory activists and special Question Time audiences and Nigel Farage. When she's been hopelessly pinned down on every nuance she can start with 27 other governments who now know what her Redl lines are. Assuming that is her Leaver opponents campaign doesn't ignite and she is her self swept away by a populist insurgency. Good Luck.
May 94 .. Crabb 22 .. Gove 18 .. Leadsom 18 .. Fox 7
As posted earlier it is time for the party to elect Teresa unopposed and get on running the Country.
Agreed. Time to stop this nonsense.
A coronation is hardly a democratic debate.
Methinks the May supporters are a little too afraid of an open contest. Upstarts can be surprisingly popular....
If it goes to a membership ballot May vs A Leaver have to spend two months having a public debate about what renegotiation will look like. We just can't have that. We need a PM and we need one with some room for manoeuvre. This is a very, very dangerous situation.
Indeed. God forbid we actually talk about what type of Leave we want. In public. Ye Gods!
Lets get in the EEA and then discuss what we want our out to look like in the long term. I'm not alarmist by nature, but the uncertainty of our single market status will begin to cause damage soon. We need the issue resolved and May is the only one who will do it in the immediacy (Crabb too, but he won't win).
I don't see the rush - it is not as if we've triggered article 50.
I was initially of the same mind Max - but now see the benefit of having a 2 month cooling off period in which Europe gets itchy feet and starts to wonder out loud if we can be pro cake and pro eating it.
The price will be passporting rights. It's not an offer we want on the table because the PM will be forced to consider it and banker popularity is not exactly high.
Sounds to me like an offer we might want to consider....?
£50bn is what the City paid into government coffers last year through payroll taxes, employee taxes, corporation taxes and various other charges and levies. It is not an industry the government should sacrifice, better to solve the immigration issue with supply side reforms to our benefits system and education.
Yes it does. A classic bait-and-switch by politicians after this referendum will not be taken well by the voters.
Your assumptions on why people voted leave are based (if at all) on polling that has already been widely discredited by the referendum itself. You cannot know with any certainty why people voted the way they did: all we have is what the leave campaigns said.
I am not 'concern trolling'. In a similar spirit: people who promoted the leave campaigns whilst they really wanted EEA or EFTA are just shyster conmen who were cynically taking the public for a ride. Bait-and-switch on an entire population.
To use the language above: only anti-democrats will want to ignore what the leave campaigns had as their core messages.
The referendum question was "Should the UK remain or leave the EU?"
"Remain" "Leave"
It was not "Should the UK stop EU immigration?"
If those who think they've been wronged want to then vote for UKIP and try and force a second referendum, that is their right, but as of now the government has a mandate only to leave the EU. I might remind you that 48% voted to remain in the EU and the single market. There must be a compromise so that the 48% aren't completely ignored, 17m vs 16m is not a landslide.
And the background to those votes was based firmly in immigration. It's telling that you cannot answer my initial question and instead attempt to deflect. So again I ask: how many time were the EEA / EFTA options mentioned in either leave campaigns' public-facing literature?
It's also quite funny to see a leaver remembering the 16m: we don't get mentioned much on here.
It's sad that you're willing to undergo bait-and-switch on an entire population. People who wanted EEA / EFTA are cynically attempting to subvert the vote just as much as those who want to ignore the result entirely. It's a shame that includes some intelligent posters on here, but there you go.
You're no better than David Lammy. Have you ever considered going on Mastermind?
One example of a possible change came in a poll of members of the Unite union carried out over the past three days. While the union still officially backs Corbyn – its general secretary, Len McCluskey, has said rebel MPs are betraying the party – the poll found that almost half of members believe Corbyn should step down immediately.
Of all Unite members polled, 49% said this should happen, with even 48% of those who said they voted Labour in 2015 agreeing. If there was a new leadership election, 44% of the Labour backers would oppose Corbyn, against 43% who would support him, the survey found.
The poll has a relatively low sample of 775, but makes for difficult reading for the Corbyn camp. Of Labour voters, 61% think Corbyn is doing badly in the job, and only 20% of them think he will ever become prime minister.
It is the £3 supporters who gave Corbyn his big lead, many of the union members backed Burnham or Cooper
He got 57% of the union vote last year, so we are looking at swingback here.
He got 59.5% overall though, a rerun race would be closer but he would still probably win
Gove has completely ****ed Leave here hasn't he? OK Boris would have lost to May in a run off but he would had a seat at the top table afterwards and had some influence. Gove as well. Now all that is gone, Gove won't make the final two, the negotiations will be handled by continuity Cameron/Osborne.
I'm beginning to think that Gove, Crabb and possibly May could the be continuity Osborne candidates.
If those who think they've been wronged want to then vote for UKIP and try and force a second referendum, that is their right, but as of now the government has a mandate only to leave the EU. I might remind you that 48% voted to remain in the EU and the single market. There must be a compromise so that the 48% aren't completely ignored, 17m vs 16m is not a landslide.
If we don't know why people left, we similarly don't know why people remained.
Given BSA says 77% of people want to reduce immigration, and 56% want to reduce it by a lot, it has to follow that at least 8% or so of Leavers want to reduce immigration by a lot! Many will have wanted to reduce immigration, but be won over by Project Fear, given the increasing perception that Project Fear was bullshit those people are going to be watching with interest.
One example of a possible change came in a poll of members of the Unite union carried out over the past three days. While the union still officially backs Corbyn – its general secretary, Len McCluskey, has said rebel MPs are betraying the party – the poll found that almost half of members believe Corbyn should step down immediately.
Of all Unite members polled, 49% said this should happen, with even 48% of those who said they voted Labour in 2015 agreeing. If there was a new leadership election, 44% of the Labour backers would oppose Corbyn, against 43% who would support him, the survey found.
The poll has a relatively low sample of 775, but makes for difficult reading for the Corbyn camp. Of Labour voters, 61% think Corbyn is doing badly in the job, and only 20% of them think he will ever become prime minister.
It is the £3 supporters who gave Corbyn his big lead, many of the union members backed Burnham or Cooper
He got 57% of the union vote last year, so we are looking at swingback here.
He got 59.5% overall though, a rerun race would be closer but he would still probably win
Looks too close to call to me, especially as the makeup of the membership can be gamed.
May 94 .. Crabb 22 .. Gove 18 .. Leadsom 18 .. Fox 7
As posted earlier it is time for the party to elect Teresa unopposed and get on running the Country.
Agreed. Time to stop this nonsense.
A coronation is hardly a democratic debate.
Methinks the May supporters are a little too afraid of an open contest. Upstarts can be surprisingly popular....
If it goes to a membership ballot May vs A Leaver have to spend two months having a public debate about what renegotiation will look like. We just can't have that. We need a PM and we need one with some room for manoeuvre. This is a very, very dangerous situation.
Indeed. God forbid we actually talk about what type of Leave we want. In public. Ye Gods!
Lets get in the EEA and then discuss what we want our out to look like in the long term. I'm not alarmist by nature, but the uncertainty of our single market status will begin to cause damage soon. We need the issue resolved and May is the only one who will do it in the immediacy (Crabb too, but he won't win).
I don't see the rush - it is not as if we've triggered article 50.
I was initially of the same mind Max - but now see the benefit of having a 2 month cooling off period in which Europe gets itchy feet and starts to wonder out loud if we can be pro cake and pro eating it.
The price will be passporting rights. It's not an offer we want on the table because the PM will be forced to consider it and banker popularity is not exactly high.
Sounds to me like an offer we might want to consider....?
£50bn is what the City paid into government coffers last year through payroll taxes, employee taxes, corporation taxes and various other charges and levies. It is not an industry the government should sacrifice, better to solve the immigration issue with supply side reforms to our benefits system and education.
We could have done that while staying in, but voted not to do so.
Shockingly it is the Theresa May backers that don't want a contest
There absolutely should be a contest, I just don't see why it's taking two months to do it while we have a lame duck PM and lots of decisions that need taking.
May 94 .. Crabb 22 .. Gove 18 .. Leadsom 18 .. Fox 7
As posted earlier it is time for the party to elect Teresa unopposed and get on running the Country.
Agreed. Time to stop this nonsense.
A coronation is hardly a democratic debate.
Methinks the May supporters are a little too afraid of an open contest. Upstarts can be surprisingly popular....
If it goes to a membership ballot May vs A Leaver have to spend two months having a public debate about what renegotiation will look like. We just can't have that. We need a PM and we need one with some room for manoeuvre. This is a very, very dangerous situation.
Indeed. God forbid we actually talk about what type of Leave we want. In public. Ye Gods!
Lets get in the EEA and then discuss what we want our out to look like in the long term. I'm not alarmist by nature, but the uncertainty of our single market status will begin to cause damage soon. We need the issue resolved and May is the only one who will do it in the immediacy (Crabb too, but he won't win).
I don't see the rush - it is not as if we've triggered article 50.
I was initially of the same mind Max - but now see the benefit of having a 2 month cooling off period in which Europe gets itchy feet and starts to wonder out loud if we can be pro cake and pro eating it.
The price will be passporting rights. It's not an offer we want on the table because the PM will be forced to consider it and banker popularity is not exactly high.
We have been hearing quite a lot from people in the last day or two that passporting was not all it was cracked up to be, and that the Forex market for example couldnt give a damn about it.
Yes it does. A classic bait-and-switch by politicians after this referendum will not be taken well by the voters.
Your assumptions on why people voted leave are based (if at all) on polling that has already been widely discredited by the referendum itself. You cannot know with any certainty why people voted the way they did: all we have is what the leave campaigns said.
I am not 'concern trolling'. In a similar spirit: people who promoted the leave campaigns whilst they really wanted EEA or EFTA are just shyster conmen who were cynically taking the public for a ride. Bait-and-switch on an entire population.
To use the language above: only anti-democrats will want to ignore what the leave campaigns had as their core messages.
The referendum question was "Should the UK remain or leave the EU?"
"Remain" "Leave"
It was not "Should the UK stop EU immigration?"
If those who think they've been wronged want to then vote for UKIP and try and force a second referendum, that is their right, but as of now the government has a mandate only to leave the EU. I might remind you that 48% voted to remain in the EU and the single market. There must be a compromise so that the 48% aren't completely ignored, 17m vs 16m is not a landslide.
Agreed - but 17m is more than have ever voted for any single party/thing in the UK.
Leaving the EU is popular - the desires of the 52% should not be forgotten either.
Absolutely and by leaving the EU we would be leaving the EU. No one, especially not me, is suggesting we shouldn't leave the EU. I voted to leave, I just don't think we should be throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Thing is - an awful lot of people want to leave the EU to end freedom of movement of labour....
Yes, and if we end up driving them to UKIP then we'll have to deal with that, but the PM will get a fig leaf on immigration that will be "good enough" to win the support of enough people that they will consider the matter settled. As I said just now, if we want to solve immigration then lets do what we can on our side by reforming education and benefits.
With the declarations at 94 Theresa + 22 Crabb and the likelyhood most of those would go to Theresa it is to be hoped that wise heads in the party put the National interest first and nominate Theresa unopposed so that we can have a cabinet and government in place by the end of this month. Would be well received by the Country and the markets. The nonsense that has been going on needs to be put behind us
Hear, hear.
Yep, get on with it. If she has a commanding lead she's obviously going to win, this is not the time for three months of enjoyable dicking about.
Unopposed, what in all f**k? What is WRONG with you people?
See my other post. I mean just have one round and if she's way ahead (surely she will be) then that's good enough, the others should withdraw.
The only real rival was Boris, and now he's gone. None of the others have a chance, I don't think.
Cobblers. Boris's supporters will go some May and some coalesce around a non-May. Two candidates will emerge, the membership will get to choose. The idea that a party that's been consistently kicked in the balls by the Cameroons should be deprived of a choice of leader in favour of a coronation of Cameron's anointed successor is RISIBLE.
The new leader will need a mandate for her position on Brexit. With such an exiguous majority, she will not be able to afford to give even a handful of dissidents the excuse to argue that the party has never decided the policy position.
Nothing is going to need a vote in parliament. Article 50 can be triggered by the PM, then the clock runs down. It will either be the negotiated deal, or WTO terms.
Well there's a topic for discussion all by itself. There are quite a few QCs who disagree with your opening sentence, including David Pannick:
Do the EU give a stuff what UK law says, the ECJ certainly doesn't ? The PM could give the EU notice and then see if anyone felt like making an issue of it afterwards, it's not like the EU is likely to let him (or anyone else) rescind his Article 50 after its been invoked.
May 94 .. Crabb 22 .. Gove 18 .. Leadsom 18 .. Fox 7
As posted earlier it is time for the party to elect Teresa unopposed and get on running the Country.
Agreed. Time to stop this nonsense.
A coronation is hardly a democratic debate.
Methinks the May supporters are a little too afraid of an open contest. Upstarts can be surprisingly popular....
If it goes to a membership ballot May vs A Leaver have to spend two months having a public debate about what renegotiation will look like. We just can't have that. We need a PM and we need one with some room for manoeuvre. This is a very, very dangerous situation.
Indeed. God forbid we actually talk about what type of Leave we want. In public. Ye Gods!
Lets get in the EEA and then discuss what we want our out to look like in the long term. I'm not alarmist by nature, but the uncertainty of our single market status will begin to cause damage soon. We need the issue resolved and May is the only one who will do it in the immediacy (Crabb too, but he won't win).
I don't see the rush - it is not as if we've triggered article 50.
I was initially of the same mind Max - but now see the benefit of having a 2 month cooling off period in which Europe gets itchy feet and starts to wonder out loud if we can be pro cake and pro eating it.
The price will be passporting rights. It's not an offer we want on the table because the PM will be forced to consider it and banker popularity is not exactly high.
Sounds to me like an offer we might want to consider....?
£50bn is what the City paid into government coffers last year through payroll taxes, employee taxes, corporation taxes and various other charges and levies. It is not an industry the government should sacrifice, better to solve the immigration issue with supply side reforms to our benefits system and education.
Agreed - a considered offer rejected and supplanted by domestic reforms might actually help from a PR point of view...
As I said just now, if we want to solve immigration then lets do what we can on our side by reforming education and benefits.
If only the Eurosceptic tendency hadn't spent the last decade saying that there was nothing we could do about EU migration then we might have made more progress on shifting those levers.
OK. Let's force May to spend all of July and August negotiating Brexit in public with her opponent and Tory activists and special Question Time audiences and Nigel Farage. When she's been hopelessly pinned down on every nuance she can start with 27 other governments who now know what her Redl lines are. Assuming that is her Leaver opponents campaign doesn't ignite and she is her self swept away by a populist insurgency. Good Luck.
Parliament will recess by the end of July and doesn't return until the Autumn, so your comments are not going to happen
The point about coronations is just as true for the Conservative party as for the Labour party. Any leader who is appointed will have much less authority than one who has won in combat.
And this time in particular, ideas need to be tested and argued. The new leader will need a mandate for her position on Brexit. With such an exiguous majority, she will not be able to afford to give even a handful of dissidents the excuse to argue that the party has never decided the policy position.
Yep - definitely should be a contest !
Yes, there should be a contest: one round. If she's way ahead then what's the point in round 2?
Alternatively bring forward round 2 to the following week.... i see no reason, as the country wobbles, to wait ten languid weeks over the summer. Ridiculous
Because there are two different contests. The MPs select 2 candidates, the membership pick the winner.
Fair enough, my bad. I forgot! It's been a stressful week
I still don't see why that requires three months. Three weeks is enough. The members will surely appreciate that this is a very different kind of election, in time of urgency
And it really IS. We do not have the option of dragging this out.
You should want a quick election, as a confirmed LEAVER. The longer this process, the greater chance of recession (and deeper recession as the uncertainty continues), then there's more chance of the the public panicking and going REMAIN. If there's a poll for 65/35 REMAIN by September, who is going to squeeze the trigger on A50?
Things have already started. The government is assembling a negotiation team, they can have some preliminary discussions with Germany/France.
If Mr Cameron had appointed a Leaver as chief negotiator rather than standing down straight away things might have gone smoother. However, as we know, HMG made no preparations for a Leave win.
The point about coronations is just as true for the Conservative party as for the Labour party. Any leader who is appointed will have much less authority than one who has won in combat.
And this time in particular, ideas need to be tested and argued. The new leader will need a mandate for her position on Brexit. With such an exiguous majority, she will not be able to afford to give even a handful of dissidents the excuse to argue that the party has never decided the policy position.
Yep - definitely should be a contest !
Yes, there should be a contest: one round. If she's way ahead then what's the point in round 2?
Alternatively bring forward round 2 to the following week.... i see no reason, as the country wobbles, to wait ten languid weeks over the summer. Ridiculous
Because there are two different contests. The MPs select 2 candidates, the membership pick the winner.
Fair enough, my bad. I forgot! It's been a stressful week
I still don't see why that requires three months. Three weeks is enough. The members will surely appreciate that this is a very different kind of election, in time of urgency
And it really IS. We do not have the option of dragging this out.
You should want a quick election, as a confirmed LEAVER. The longer this process, the greater chance of recession (and deeper recession as the uncertainty continues), then there's more chance of the the public panicking and going REMAIN. If there's a poll for 65/35 REMAIN by September, who is going to squeeze the trigger on A50?
Yes it does. A classic bait-and-switch by politicians after this referendum will not be taken well by the voters.
Your assumptions on why people voted leave are based (if at all) on polling that has already been widely discredited by the referendum itself. You cannot know with any certainty why people voted the way they did: all we have is what the leave campaigns said.
I am not 'concern trolling'. In a similar spirit: people who promoted the leave campaigns whilst they really wanted EEA or EFTA are just shyster conmen who were cynically taking the public for a ride. Bait-and-switch on an entire population.
To use the language above: only anti-democrats will want to ignore what the leave campaigns had as their core messages.
The referendum question was "Should the UK remain or leave the EU?"
"Remain" "Leave"
It was not "Should the UK stop EU immigration?"
If those who think they've been wronged want to then vote for UKIP and try and force a second referendum, that is their right, but as of now the government has a mandate only to leave the EU. I might remind you that 48% voted to remain in the EU and the single market. There must be a compromise so that the 48% aren't completely ignored, 17m vs 16m is not a landslide.
Agreed - but 17m is more than have ever voted for any single party/thing in the UK.
Leaving the EU is popular - the desires of the 52% should not be forgotten either.
Absolutely and by leaving the EU we would be leaving the EU. No one, especially not me, is suggesting we shouldn't leave the EU. I voted to leave, I just don't think we should be throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Thing is - an awful lot of people want to leave the EU to end freedom of movement of labour....
Yes, and if we end up driving them to UKIP then we'll have to deal with that, but the PM will get a fig leaf on immigration that will be "good enough" to win the support of enough people that they will consider the matter settled. As I said just now, if we want to solve immigration then lets do what we can on our side by reforming education and benefits.
Is there a way we can legitimately discriminate against newly arrived foreign nationals if we're in the EEA?
E.G. residency test on in work and out of work benefits? Residency test on public service provision?
If so, we should do it. But if so, don't the EU nations know we're going to do that?
With the declarations at 94 Theresa + 22 Crabb and the likelyhood most of those would go to Theresa it is to be hoped that wise heads in the party put the National interest first and nominate Theresa unopposed so that we can have a cabinet and government in place by the end of this month. Would be well received by the Country and the markets. The nonsense that has been going on needs to be put behind us
Hear, hear.
Yep, get on with it. If she has a commanding lead she's obviously going to win, this is not the time for three months of enjoyable dicking about.
Unopposed, what in all f**k? What is WRONG with you people?
See my other post. I mean just have one round and if she's way ahead (surely she will be) then that's good enough, the others should withdraw.
The only real rival was Boris, and now he's gone. None of the others have a chance, I don't think.
So the members, already pissed off with their MPs because a lot of them are careerists that lied about their euroscepticism are going to be happy to see the PCP stitch up a "remain" PM without asking them ? Seems optimistic.
Yes it does. A classic bait-and-switch by politicians after this referendum will not be taken well by the voters.
Your assumptions on why people voted leave are based (if at all) on polling that has already been widely discredited by the referendum itself. You cannot know with any certainty why people voted the way they did: all we have is what the leave campaigns said.
I am not 'concern trolling'. In a similar spirit: people who promoted the leave campaigns whilst they really wanted EEA or EFTA are just shyster conmen who were cynically taking the public for a ride. Bait-and-switch on an entire population.
To use the language above: only anti-democrats will want to ignore what the leave campaigns had as their core messages.
The referendum question was "Should the UK remain or leave the EU?"
"Remain" "Leave"
It was not "Should the UK stop EU immigration?"
If those who think they've been wronged want to then vote for UKIP and try and force a second referendum, that is their right, but as of now the government has a mandate only to leave the EU. I might remind you that 48% voted to remain in the EU and the single market. There must be a compromise so that the 48% aren't completely ignored, 17m vs 16m is not a landslide.
Agreed - but 17m is more than have ever voted for any single party/thing in the UK.
Leaving the EU is popular - the desires of the 52% should not be forgotten either.
Absolutely and by leaving the EU we would be leaving the EU. No one, especially not me, is suggesting we shouldn't leave the EU. I voted to leave, I just don't think we should be throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Thing is - an awful lot of people want to leave the EU to end freedom of movement of labour....
Yes, and if we end up driving them to UKIP then we'll have to deal with that, but the PM will get a fig leaf on immigration that will be "good enough" to win the support of enough people that they will consider the matter settled. As I said just now, if we want to solve immigration then lets do what we can on our side by reforming education and benefits.
Which will not be enough for many, many people, especially given the leave campaigns' platforms. Worse, even if it does work it'll take time - especially with education. And in the meantime the stresses caused by immigration will continue.
I voted remain, and I accept the result. But it's sad to see so-called leavers on here ignoring the evident will of the people for results that suit them personally. At best they're bait-and-switch snake-oil salesmen.
OK. Let's force May to spend all of July and August negotiating Brexit in public with her opponent and Tory activists and special Question Time audiences and Nigel Farage. When she's been hopelessly pinned down on every nuance she can start with 27 other governments who now know what her Redl lines are. Assuming that is her Leaver opponents campaign doesn't ignite and she is her self swept away by a populist insurgency. Good Luck.
There is little point in May agreeing a position with the rEU if unable to carry her government with it, and to rely on opposition MPs to get such an agreement through Parliament.
You Brexit, Youfixit. We need an agreement that lasts rather than a Euro-hokeycokey.
Yes it does. A classic bait-and-switch by politicians after this referendum will not be taken well by the voters.
Your assumptions on why people voted leave are based (if at all) on polling that has already been widely discredited by the referendum itself. You cannot know with any certainty why people voted the way they did: all we have is what the leave campaigns said.
I am not 'concern trolling'. In a similar spirit: people who promoted the leave campaigns whilst they really wanted EEA or EFTA are just shyster conmen who were cynically taking the public for a ride. Bait-and-switch on an entire population.
To use the language above: only anti-democrats will want to ignore what the leave campaigns had as their core messages.
The referendum question was "Should the UK remain or leave the EU?"
"Remain" "Leave"
It was not "Should the UK stop EU immigration?"
If those who think they've been wronged want to then vote for UKIP and try and force a second referendum, that is their right, but as of now the government has a mandate only to leave the EU. I might remind you that 48% voted to remain in the EU and the single market. There must be a compromise so that the 48% aren't completely ignored, 17m vs 16m is not a landslide.
Well said. I am one of the 48%, we need a rapid solution to the unfolding loss of confidence in the Uk.
Unfolding loss of confidence?
I'm not seeing that at all - especially not in exports ;-)
Seeing it in my family, my son works for a major construction company,projects were on hold before the ref, and now on an even longer hold,not good.
As I said just now, if we want to solve immigration then lets do what we can on our side by reforming education and benefits.
If only the Eurosceptic tendency hadn't spent the last decade saying that there was nothing we could do about EU migration then we might have made more progress on shifting those levers.
Plenty of us have been seeing we need to move to a contributory system of benefits, for years. It is the only way to solve mass migration, if you must have Free Movement.
For migrants maybe, for the domestic population the German system is best, a basic level of benefits but the highest benefits for those who have made the most insurance contributions
Part 3: PROCEDURE FOR THE ELECTION OF LEADER OF THE PARTY BY THE GENERAL MEMBERSHIP OF THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY
36. The two candidates selected by the Parliamentary Party will go forward to a postal ballot of all members of the Conservative Party as defined in Schedule 2, rule 5 of the Party’s Constitution.
37. The Returning Officer shall agree with the Board the closing date for the ballot which shall be as soon as practicable after the date of the last ballot of the Parliamentary Party.
In what sort of a world is 10 weeks "as soon as practicable" ?
Yes it does. A classic bait-and-switch by politicians after this referendum will not be taken well by the voters.
Your assumptions on why people voted leave are based (if at all) on polling that has already been widely discredited by the referendum itself. You cannot know with any certainty why people voted the way they did: all we have is what the leave campaigns said.
I am not 'concern trolling'. In a similar spirit: people who promoted the leave campaigns whilst they really wanted EEA or EFTA are just shyster conmen who were cynically taking the public for a ride. Bait-and-switch on an entire population.
To use the language above: only anti-democrats will want to ignore what the leave campaigns had as their core messages.
The referendum question was "Should the UK remain or leave the EU?"
"Remain" "Leave"
It was not "Should the UK stop EU immigration?"
If those who think they've been wronged want to then vote for UKIP and try and force a second referendum, that is their right, but as of now the government has a mandate only to leave the EU. I might remind you that 48% voted to remain in the EU and the single market. There must be a compromise so that the 48% aren't completely ignored, 17m vs 16m is not a landslide.
Agreed - but 17m is more than have ever voted for any single party/thing in the UK.
Leaving the EU is popular - the desires of the 52% should not be forgotten either.
Absolutely and by leaving the EU we would be leaving the EU. No one, especially not me, is suggesting we shouldn't leave the EU. I voted to leave, I just don't think we should be throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Thing is - an awful lot of people want to leave the EU to end freedom of movement of labour....
Yes, and if we end up driving them to UKIP then we'll have to deal with that, but the PM will get a fig leaf on immigration that will be "good enough" to win the support of enough people that they will consider the matter settled. As I said just now, if we want to solve immigration then lets do what we can on our side by reforming education and benefits.
Afraid I don't see this as a party issue.
Many of the people who voted Leave are not currently Tory voters. But they're citizens of this country too long unrepresented. Our government needs to immediately reengage with them - not wait for them to go to UKIP....
I think two candidates could drop out on Tuesday even though only one will be officially eliminated. Probably Fox and Crabb.
Allowing for being 100% gobsmaked after the events of the past seven days and making some broad assumptions on the Sky News numbers we might in Round 1 end up :
May 195 .. Crabb 40 .. Gove 40 .. Leadsom 40 .. Fox 15 .. Falconer 1
ok. I may have over-reached on the tory family coming back together
Nadine Dorries @NadineDorriesMP 2m2 minutes ago I am utterly astounded to discover that some MPs are actually backing Gove. Clearly, honesty and honour not a consideration for some.
I think two candidates could drop out on Tuesday even though only one will be officially eliminated. Probably Fox and Crabb.
Allowing for being 100% gobsmaked after the events of the past seven days and making some broad assumptions on the Sky News numbers we might in Round 1 end up :
May 195 .. Crabb 40 .. Gove 40 .. Leadsom 40 .. Fox 15 .. Falconer 1
OK. Let's force May to spend all of July and August negotiating Brexit in public with her opponent and Tory activists and special Question Time audiences and Nigel Farage. When she's been hopelessly pinned down on every nuance she can start with 27 other governments who now know what her Redl lines are. Assuming that is her Leaver opponents campaign doesn't ignite and she is her self swept away by a populist insurgency. Good Luck.
Parliament will recess by the end of July and doesn't return until the Autumn, so your comments are not going to happen
The scenario were discussing is a contested election. A summer holiday all member postal ballot of Conservative Party members ending on September 9th. Are you suggesting they'll be no hustings for party members to attend ? No TV debates or events ? No polling ? No in depth interviews of the candidates ? No campaign groups pushing agendas all summer long ? How odd.
As I said just now, if we want to solve immigration then lets do what we can on our side by reforming education and benefits.
If only the Eurosceptic tendency hadn't spent the last decade saying that there was nothing we could do about EU migration then we might have made more progress on shifting those levers.
Who has been saying this? A decade of quotes please. My recollection is that the 'eurosceptic tendency' have been the ones pushing whatever we could do about benefit reform, and the europhiles have been the ones being thoroughly useless about it.
The new leader will need a mandate for her position on Brexit. With such an exiguous majority, she will not be able to afford to give even a handful of dissidents the excuse to argue that the party has never decided the policy position.
Nothing is going to need a vote in parliament. Article 50 can be triggered by the PM, then the clock runs down. It will either be the negotiated deal, or WTO terms.
The problem with WTO is that... we're going to be WTO with everyone for a long-time.
Or we end up pathetically begging to get some better than WTO deals with people from a position of weakness. It could make the one-sidedness of the China-Switzerland or US-Australia deals look like models of reasonableness.
The new leader will need a mandate for her position on Brexit. With such an exiguous majority, she will not be able to afford to give even a handful of dissidents the excuse to argue that the party has never decided the policy position.
Nothing is going to need a vote in parliament. Article 50 can be triggered by the PM, then the clock runs down. It will either be the negotiated deal, or WTO terms.
The problem with WTO is that... we're going to be WTO with everyone for a long-time.
Or we end up pathetically begging to get some better than WTO deals with people from a position of weakness. It could make the one-sidedness of the China-Switzerland or US-Australia deals look like models of reasonableness.
Comments
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3667469/Remain-island-No-pity-Offensive-graffiti-bullying-notes-postboxes-defaced-welcome-bitter-world-EU-British-MEPs-subjected-campaign-intimidation-Brussels-post-Brexit.html
Newspoll and Essential research 50.5 Coalition 49.5 Labour
Reachtel 51 Coalition 49 Labor
Fairfax Ipsos 50 Coalition 50 Labor
Galaxy 51 Coalition 49 Labor
https://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/
Methinks the May supporters are a little too afraid of an open contest. Upstarts can be surprisingly popular....
Someone needs to actually make the challenge, but no-one dares be the one who splits the party by triggering the contest that sees Corbyn win again. The sensible wing of the PLP might as well all resign now, they're getting deselected anyway and don't have a spine between the lot of them!
When will Labour learn?
I am posting now from a "Thankful" village where I live occasionally, but my main residence is near one of a very few "Double Thankful" villages. The whole country was affected, the Pals brigades were horrific for the towns and villages.
Labour goes out of their way to put him on the ballot, the Tories make sure he doesn't even get that close.
Also at least the Labour party haven't subjected the country to a daft referendum.
And this time in particular, ideas need to be tested and argued. The new leader will need a mandate for her position on Brexit. With such an exiguous majority, she will not be able to afford to give even a handful of dissidents the excuse to argue that the party has never decided the policy position.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3669617/Silent-actors-dressed-ghost-soldiers-posted-stations-country-poignant-reminder-lost-bloody-Battle-Somme.html
Apparently it was organised by the National Theatre and involved 20,000 volunteers. Very very well done indeed
I think no harm in making Jezza sweat some more.
Yes it does. A classic bait-and-switch by politicians after this referendum will not be taken well by the voters.
Your assumptions on why people voted leave are based (if at all) on polling that has already been widely discredited by the referendum itself. You cannot know with any certainty why people voted the way they did: all we have is what the leave campaigns said.
I am not 'concern trolling'. In a similar spirit: people who promoted the leave campaigns whilst they really wanted EEA or EFTA are just shyster conmen who were cynically taking the public for a ride. Bait-and-switch on an entire population.
To use the language above: only anti-democrats will want to ignore what the leave campaigns had as their core messages.
I think betfair have copied that last sentence across wrong.
But interesting that's the rule in Austria!
I was initially of the same mind Max - but now see the benefit of having a 2 month cooling off period in which Europe gets itchy feet and starts to wonder out loud if we can be pro cake and pro eating it.
"Remain"
"Leave"
It was not "Should the UK stop EU immigration?"
If those who think they've been wronged want to then vote for UKIP and try and force a second referendum, that is their right, but as of now the government has a mandate only to leave the EU. I might remind you that 48% voted to remain in the EU and the single market. There must be a compromise so that the 48% aren't completely ignored, 17m vs 16m is not a landslide.
Yesterday's events were very, very odd and I'd not be at all surprised if they are paving the way for May.
Leaving the EU is popular - the desires of the 52% should not be forgotten either.
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/why-giving-notice-of-withdrawal-from-the-eu-requires-act-of-parliament-dz7s85dmw
If we join the EEA then it should be explicitly for the long term.
I am one of the 48%, we need a rapid solution to the unfolding loss of confidence in the Uk.
I'm not seeing that at all - especially not in exports ;-)
It's also quite funny to see a leaver remembering the 16m: we don't get mentioned much on here.
It's sad that you're willing to undergo bait-and-switch on an entire population. People who wanted EEA / EFTA are cynically attempting to subvert the vote just as much as those who want to ignore the result entirely. It's a shame that includes some intelligent posters on here, but there you go.
You're no better than David Lammy. Have you ever considered going on Mastermind?
Given BSA says 77% of people want to reduce immigration, and 56% want to reduce it by a lot, it has to follow that at least 8% or so of Leavers want to reduce immigration by a lot! Many will have wanted to reduce immigration, but be won over by Project Fear, given the increasing perception that Project Fear was bullshit those people are going to be watching with interest.
If Mr Cameron had appointed a Leaver as chief negotiator rather than standing down straight away things might have gone smoother. However, as we know, HMG made no preparations for a Leave win.
E.G. residency test on in work and out of work benefits? Residency test on public service provision?
If so, we should do it. But if so, don't the EU nations know we're going to do that?
I voted remain, and I accept the result. But it's sad to see so-called leavers on here ignoring the evident will of the people for results that suit them personally. At best they're bait-and-switch snake-oil salesmen.
You Brexit, Youfixit. We need an agreement that lasts rather than a Euro-hokeycokey.
Part 3: PROCEDURE FOR THE ELECTION OF LEADER OF THE PARTY BY THE GENERAL MEMBERSHIP OF THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY
36. The two candidates selected by the Parliamentary Party will go forward to a postal ballot of all members of the Conservative Party as defined in Schedule 2, rule 5 of the Party’s Constitution.
37. The Returning Officer shall agree with the Board the closing date for the ballot which shall be as soon as practicable after the date of the last ballot of the Parliamentary Party.
In what sort of a world is 10 weeks "as soon as practicable" ?
Many of the people who voted Leave are not currently Tory voters. But they're citizens of this country too long unrepresented. Our government needs to immediately reengage with them - not wait for them to go to UKIP....
May 195 .. Crabb 40 .. Gove 40 .. Leadsom 40 .. Fox 15 .. Falconer 1
Coronation ?!?
Nadine Dorries @NadineDorriesMP 2m2 minutes ago
I am utterly astounded to discover that some MPs are actually backing Gove. Clearly, honesty and honour not a consideration for some.
Or we end up pathetically begging to get some better than WTO deals with people from a position of weakness. It could make the one-sidedness of the China-Switzerland or US-Australia deals look like models of reasonableness.
Always negotiate from a position of strength.
Can you get a job working for the EU if you are not an EU citizen (so to speak) ?