Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » If May cannot deliver a Brexit deal then Labour should call a
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » If May cannot deliver a Brexit deal then Labour should call a vote of no confidence in her government
Some Tories are floating the idea that Britain might leave Brexit talks with no deal in the end. That’s not good enough says Keiran Pedley. Labour must make clear that if it looks like the government cannot deliver a Brexit deal, then they will call a vote of no confidence.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Congratulations to Sunil for doing the Glasgow Subway.
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/904446789910220800
Only the most optimistic of brexiteers thought it would be plain sailing the whole way.
I agree though - failure to get a deal of any sort is a failure of govt.
Who gets blamed though?
With this in mind, despite her declining reputation, many voters still believed that May would outperform Corbyn as prime minister. She leads in a series of key policy areas: EU negotiations, national security, immigration, the economy. She is also ahead on “taking tough decisions even if they are unpopular”, while Corbyn wins on “empathy measures” such as “understands people like me
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/sep/02/what-does-britain-want-in-leader-integrity-empathy-authenticity
What is certain is that there will be some very tight votes and the opposition parties will try and ambush the government where possible. MPs are going to have to spend the next couple of years very close to the Commons from Monday morning until Friday night, the whips are going to be very busy keeping track of people.
If there really is chaos at the border, people losing their jobs - then my gut instinct is that this will be one of those things that cuts through tribal/party political lines and the govt will be blamed.
But it also depends how long any turmoil lasts. You'd think that the govt would be able to get it under control in a few weeks... and ride through the temporary blip.
On the other hand - if the impact is actually fairly limited - then perhaps TM will get a lot of credit for 'standing up for Britain' and facing down the EU blackmailers...?
German TV debate was last night,
https://www.welt.de/politik/deutschland/article168275880/Wer-punktete-bei-welchem-Thema-Merkel-und-Schulz-im-Substanz-Check.html
if the Tories are going to make a comeback they need something worthwhile on wages, housing, infrastructure and higher education
@PippaCrerar: "There's nothing weird & certainly nothing treacherous about putting down an amendment... it's called democracy" - @annasoubrymp #brexitbill
Again, probably correctly, Corbyn and McDonnell believe that Labour's real opportunity comes post-Brexit.
They seem to have got the politics of this pretty much spot on. But it's immensely bad news for the UK that both major parties are putting their own interests before those of the country.
The frothers will froth at the EU27 treating us as an external state, even though we will be.
https://twitter.com/FastfoodRights/status/904440076360458241
Enough people are scared of their anti-cap, anti-west politics to ever let them in. At worst, lots of hung parliaments with Lab not having enough seats to form a government/do anything the way forward until the Tories get over their Camborne hangover.
F1: as I mentioned in my post-race ramble: http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2017/09/italy-post-race-analysis-2017.html
we might very well see an announcement today or tomorrow from McLaren regarding their engine for 2018. Most seem to think it'll be Renault.
Laying down a marker now that car crash Brexit would be a failure is smart politics.
Perhaps that would not be the case if we had a strong government that had been planning for the eventuality for several years - but that is so far from reality that it's not even a joke.
The polls we were talking about over the last couple of days show quite clearly that only around a quarter of voters are prepared to pay a significant cost (in any form) for Brexit. The true believers will, of course, blame Europe. They do not in any way constitute a viable majority.
I think Ken will vote against it.
"Rage, rage, against the dying of the light."
@DAaronovitch: Barry Gardiner busy transitioning from one kind of bullshit to another. @BBCr4today
Yes?
I've got Keir Starmer on line 1 for you. Says it's urgent.
I think that after three years the patience at Woking has finally run out.
All, are guilty of trying to guide the information available in ways which seem ludicrous to people who are increasingly becoming technology media savvy who are getting their news from alternative sources, and are confirming the information from the source origin and not from the opinion of a journalist employed by a non-uk resident multi billionaire, and the gestalt of the many people actively discussing it in the various forums and platforms in social media. False news is being flagged and challenged by many. Consensus of opinion builds which is beyond the control of any one group, Government, political party or vested interest across the spectrum.
Like for example, PoliticalBetting.com
A pleasant ramble,which puts me in mind of Coleridge... 'there is a Morris Dancer, and he tippeth one in three....'
Re Singapore... what if it should rain ?
Providing it weren't washed out entirely, that would be a spectacular race.
So if Labour want to bring down the government and fight a general election on a platform of paying 100 billion euros to the EU and leaving free movement uncontrolled for years I am sure most Tories would say ' be my guest!'
the #mcstrike is an interesting international response to a globalised issue.
"A significant part of popular press will blame the EU, even if the chaos is demonstrably the Governments fault."
You're old enough to remember 'On the buses' and the famous phrase .... "I 'ate you, Butler."
Barnier has updated it to "I 'ate you, Britain." This is the man negotiating for the EU, the man you believe is trying to negotiate fairly? Really?
I'm afraid the only way some Remainers want a deal is for the UK to give in to every demand or to Remain.
Historys greatest monster
Excellent podcast, if you haven't listened to it yet. Manages to say new and interesting things about Brexit.
Mr. B, thanks. It was nice to have a green race, although I'm moderately peeved I only mentioned (and specifically did not tip) all Mercedes-powered cars to score at 11. I had a little sum on.
A few years ago there was the possibility of rain at Singapore and some trepidation regarding water on track added to numerous powerful floodlights. Would it blind or distract drivers?
Never had a wet race there, so no idea about drainage either.
Considering that those who voted remain didn't want to be in this position in any event, a random slur like that is pure displacement activity.
Where we are is entirely down to the 'yes' vote. Many of us who argued against Brexit pointed out the utter lack of a consistent map for what would happen next, and were met with little more than handwaving.
It is true that Europe is being distinctly unhelpful - but that was both predictable, and predicted, and in any event beyond our control.
"You owe us £100 billion pounds, so it says on the back of this fag packet I'm holding aloft. No talks until you pay it, and even then, no surrender on any points."
A very reasonable man.
You broke it, you own it.
A random slur?
"Some Remainers" is indeed the truth, unless the English language has changed dramatically. If you think all posters on PB are innocent of that charge, I suggest you try the Guardian website.
They may be a small minority, but they are the gobby ones. There are no tanks? Or there are some tanks?
Obama is an American citizen being one of the primary examples.
We are on a handcart to hell if we continue to destroy the idea of journalism as a craft and profession (full of human flaws as it is and always has been).
And, remember, it wasn't the 27 that started this fight; it was Britain.
I feel the govt should spend more time negotiating and less whinging about how nasty Barnier is being for not letting have our cake and eat it
The question of interest ... "Is Monsieur Barnier being reasonable?"
No answers seem to be forthcoming. You may well believe that "we started the fight" , but that is not the answer to the question. We started the fight by voting No, therefore we shouldn't have done. Is the EU a voluntary grouping or a prison cell?
I quoted On The Buses because Blakey (Barnier) was a figure of fun. And then you come to Juncker? The Chuckle Brothers may well be heroes to some on the Remain side, but they are also rapidly becoming heroes to some on the Leave side - for a different reason.
It's now essential to sack David Davis and appoint someone competent. Whatever the tabloid press might say it's become obvious that we have put our future in the hands of a donkey. It'll lead to a Corbyn landslide
And as for the Chuckle Brothers, in this context I have absolutely no idea who you mean. The only political ones I recall are McGuiness and Paisley, both of whom are now dead.
"It's now essential to sack David Davis and appoint someone competent."
Would that make any difference? Barnier will stick to his script whoever he is facing. The only agreement will be his agreement.
BTW, I never believed it would go smoothly. The EU faces a major threat to its credibility. it can't be seem to lose face, even if it loses economically.
The predicament of the two strikers in the guardian article were as much a product of their personal circumstances as the terms and conditions of their employment with McDonalds. But this has legs: in the real world people are finding themselves being poorly paid in relation to the cost of living particularly housing, and that employment is hugely insecure. Government have found themselves totally powerless in the face of these problems.
If Corbyn wants to fight the next general election on the platform of paying 100 billion euros to the EU and uncontrolled free movement then let him!
Virtually no Guardian readers vote Tory anyway
There are two deals here:-
1. The exit deal. This is the only one the EU is interested in, seemingly. This is essentially about settling accounts: what Britain owes and is owed on departure.
2. The nature of the future relationship. This is the only one Britain is interested in, the EU less so (again seemingly).
Article 50 links the two. But the EU's approach appears to be ignoring this, save for the fact that the two matters which they are concerned about - the border with Ireland and the rights of EU citizens - do form part of 2 above. Britain is saying that if you are going to discuss those you need to discuss the other matters as well. Even if that is correct, there is no real way of forcing the EU to do so. And time is not on Britain's side. That is a problem for us rather than the EU.
The other issue on money is that, as far as I can tell, there does not appear to be an agreed legal basis for determining what we owe and are owed in return ie what assets we have acquired and what liabilities we have incurred. It would help if that were set out - or at least Britain's view of this.
Even if Labour play clever politics with this, it does not help with getting a deal. Time is still running out and the chances of getting any sort of a deal, even with a Labour government, are low.
So we need to plan for a WTO Brexit. We may get a transitional deal, essentially the same as now but then what? It will look as if we've paid a lot of money to LINO. And the EU will have little interest thereafter in agreeing a deal with Britain.
All a bit of a mess, really.
We have turned up on the battlefield without weapons or ammunition and realistically all we can offer is abject surrender. That none of our leaders forsaw this is criminal and I would expect an almighty reckoning.
You're correct.
Basically, the EU is saying ... Give us the money we ask for, or no deal on trade. Were the UK government to take a stance like that, there would be accusations of 'naked blackmail'. Although I'm not sure what clothed blackmail would look like.
" ...all we can offer is abject surrender. "
Just like Agincourt, really. I'm sure Mr Dancer can elaborate.
I suppose we could take their failure properly to implement Article 50 to the European Court....
If we run out of time for a deal, its the Tories fault for invoking article 50 when they were not ready for negotiations.
If we had no deal, then the options are only leave or remain (assuming the latter is even an option). If Labour isn't proposing another referendum, what policy change would actually be effected?
I'm sure we can all think of candidates for XYZ. Though in certain cases how much credibilty there is left to threaten is debatable.
Hyufd
42% who voted against Labour do. McDonald's provides cheap food and good starter jobs
Yes to many so called starter jobs and not enough work where a family can afford a house.My father worked as a site joiner in the 60s and 70s my mother did not work, he had three children.He had a 3 bed semi detached a car and holidays.Today in the same circumstances even if the mother was working they still would not be able to own their own house in York.People are getting pissed of with both working the clock round and paying rent and in their eyes getting nowhere.
I thought the EU needed us more than we needed them.
Britain's concern is that even if we do pay, we still won't get any deal. It will be the same as giving up the rebate and getting nothing other than warm words about CAP. I think that's a reasonable concern.
There are two possible options:-
1. Setting out the amount of money, taking into account what is owed to us, we think is legally due. Plus what we want by way of a trade deal and what we are prepared to pay for that. Put it on the table and see whether the EU is interested.
Or
2. Say that we will only at this stage pay what is legally owed and that unless the EU agrees to enter into a trade deal - rather than just think about the possibility - though obviously the terms will need to be agreed and be different from membership - we cannot discuss any of the issues integral to such a deal, including payment. This involves hard Brexit obviously and we should anyway be preparing for this.
I would also say that any EU citizens living here now can continue doing so and will have the same rights as British citizens. Anyone coming here after exit will have the rights and obligations under UK law.
1 is generous and risky but may have the advantage of seizing the initiative and, possibly, showing the EU what it may have to lose.
What we appear to be doing now is talking like 1, behaving like 2, not preparing for hard Brexit and being mean to people living here in good faith. Some recalibration required......
60% of the country are still homeowners and have a house price for their homes far higher than your parents had, thanks to Osborne's IHT tax cut that value will also pass down in large part to their children
Higher rates would be good for those trying to get onto the housing ladder, as well as pensioners (perhaps a rare case in today's politics of a change helping the youngest and oldest voters).