The vote will be to keep us in A customs union, not The customs union.
The Kobayashi Maru play on that would be to create one just for a single insignificant category of goods, say aluminium widgets only, whilst not having it for anything else.
That would respect the parliamentary vote, and troll the new bastards superbly.
And then when people see how well the aluminium widget businesses are doing they'll want it for their industry.
If you want Brexit to work you are going to have to work a lot harder than coming up with some clever rhetoric. The UK has to consistently do better economically than the EU or the already high level of pressure to rejoin will become irresistible.
I’m convinced we will have an election, second referendum or change of government this year. The Tory rebels have tasted blood. They will bring down May’s government.
If the New Bastards rebel with the help of the Opposition, the ERG will rebel against whatever they've imposed and refuse to back the deal.
It just raises the overall prospect of no deal and the fall of the Government.
No deal will not happen. It would be disastrous for the economy in the near term as we’ve made no preparations, so it will not be allowed to happen.
Key to events is whether it is the customs union vote in May/June or the deal in itself that is rejected. If it’s the former, May can’t go for a referendum because there’s no agreement with the EU, so it would have to be a general election or letting Corbyn govern. I don’t think a change of Tory leader would solve things, especially if a Moggite won. A second referendum is much more likely once ‘the deal’ has been agreed in October. It would be quite feasible to have a referendum on that before the end of the year.
Mr. Slackbladder, that may very well be the intention of those seeking to keep us in the customs union. Get us a deal that they can take to the country claiming to be worse than the status quo, then ask for referendum 2.
Ostensibly, it seems a strange cause to be prepared to bring down the government (and end one's political career) over. (Snip)
Tell that to the Eurosceptic 'bastards' who helped bring down Major's government. .
Major’s second government served its full term.
You know what I mean! The party was at war with itself, thanks to the Eurosceptics, and that war hardly helped Major fight off the media assault on his government. If that very uncivil war had not happened, then Major still might not have won in 1997, but Labour would not have won such a stonking majority. Or perhaps there might have been another 1992-style surprise.
That majority Labour government was, I believe, bad for the country, and we are still living with its effects today.
One thing's for sure: Conservatives must be thanking their lucky stars that someone like Corbyn is at the helm of Labour, rather than another Blair. It's their only hope, and a poor hope at that.
On topic I think May has no choice but to try to face this down. If she loses she probably has to resign and the government may well fall but she really cannot undertake the negotiations with the EU being held to ransom like this.
She is already being held to ransom by the Ultras.
At least the new bastards have a grip on reality...
She needs to face them down too. And, in fairness, so far she has.
Another problem that arises from ACU or TCU going forward is that it is the EU who negotiates any future deals. Are we really wanting them to do that for us (even if they were willing)? Its been bad enough as a Member with deal after deal focussing on manufacturing and agriculture rather than access for our service industries. In theory we could come along too for the discussion but as long as we are tied to the EU by ACU or TCU we will have no negotiating position at all.
What does ACU give to the NI situation that a FTA doesn't? Well, for the classes of goods it covers we would not have to worry about external content so for those classes of goods the border is less of an issue. But if one considers the total trade between NI and the Republic is roughly £1.5bn of exports from Eire and £1bn of imports one sees that this is not a massive amount of trade to be regulated and to have agreements about content etc about. Once Eire has agreed that the foreign content of a Dell is, say, 40% of the value it is not necessary to have any more checks on their deliveries.
And when the EU negotiates access to our market for Country A, we do not get reciprocal rights to Country A’s market - which “true patriots” (sic) support that?
Another problem that arises from ACU or TCU going forward is that it is the EU who negotiates any future deals. Are we really wanting them to do that for us (even if they were willing)? Its been bad enough as a Member with deal after deal focussing on manufacturing and agriculture rather than access for our service industries. In theory we could come along too for the discussion but as long as we are tied to the EU by ACU or TCU we will have no negotiating position at all.
What does ACU give to the NI situation that a FTA doesn't? Well, for the classes of goods it covers we would not have to worry about external content so for those classes of goods the border is less of an issue. But if one considers the total trade between NI and the Republic is roughly £1.5bn of exports from Eire and £1bn of imports one sees that this is not a massive amount of trade to be regulated and to have agreements about content etc about. Once Eire has agreed that the foreign content of a Dell is, say, 40% of the value it is not necessary to have any more checks on their deliveries.
And when the EU negotiates access to our market for Country A, we do not get reciprocal rights to Country A’s market - which “true patriots” (sic) support that?
Well yes, it really is a daft idea. Even if we do get the right to export our olive oil harvest on favourable terms it is probably not going to be what we want out of any such deal.
Mr. Slackbladder, that may very well be the intention of those seeking to keep us in the customs union. Get us a deal that they can take to the country claiming to be worse than the status quo, then ask for referendum 2.
Ostensibly, it seems a strange cause to be prepared to bring down the government (and end one's political career) over. (Snip)
Tell that to the Eurosceptic 'bastards' who helped bring down Major's government. .
Major’s second government served its full term.
You know what I mean! The party was at war with itself, thanks to the Eurosceptics, and that war hardly helped Major fight off the media assault on his government. If that very uncivil war had not happened, then Major still might not have won in 1997, but Labour would not have won such a stonking majority. Or perhaps there might have been another 1992-style surprise.
That majority Labour government was, I believe, bad for the country, and we are still living with its effects today.
One thing's for sure: Conservatives must be thanking their lucky stars that someone like Corbyn is at the helm of Labour, rather than another Blair. It's their only hope, and a poor hope at that.
Just suppose there was a by-election in a safe labour seat, Blair stood and won!
Mr. Slackbladder, that may very well be the intention of those seeking to keep us in the customs union. Get us a deal that they can take to the country claiming to be worse than the status quo, then ask for referendum 2.
Ostensibly, it seems a strange cause to be prepared to bring down the government (and end one's political career) over. (Snip)
Tell that to the Eurosceptic 'bastards' who helped bring down Major's government. .
Major’s second government served its full term.
You know what I mean! The party was at war with itself, thanks to the Eurosceptics, and that war hardly helped Major fight off the media assault on his government. If that very uncivil war had not happened, then Major still might not have won in 1997, but Labour would not have won such a stonking majority. Or perhaps there might have been another 1992-style surprise.
That majority Labour government was, I believe, bad for the country, and we are still living with its effects today.
One thing's for sure: Conservatives must be thanking their lucky stars that someone like Corbyn is at the helm of Labour, rather than another Blair. It's their only hope, and a poor hope at that.
In the context of a “government being brought down” its a non-trivial difference. TBH I think the biggest factor was “They’ve been in long enough, time to give the other lot a go (and that Mr Blair seems like a nice young man)”
FYI - The Sunday Times also say there's only 3 Labour MPs who will definitely back the government in such a vote.
Hoey, Field, and Stringer.
The rest of the Labour Leavers are way too partisan and will not turn down the opportunity to topple Mrs May/the government.
When you couple it with this
Karen Bradley, the Northern Ireland secretary, warned May that the Democratic Unionists propping up the government should not be relied upon to “turn up” and vote to save her.
Another problem that arises from ACU or TCU going forward is that it is the EU who negotiates any future deals. Are we really wanting them to do that for us (even if they were willing)? Its been bad enough as a Member with deal after deal focussing on manufacturing and agriculture rather than access for our service industries. In theory we could come along too for the discussion but as long as we are tied to the EU by ACU or TCU we will have no negotiating position at all.
What does ACU give to the NI situation that a FTA doesn't? Well, for the classes of goods it covers we would not have to worry about external content so for those classes of goods the border is less of an issue. But if one considers the total trade between NI and the Republic is roughly £1.5bn of exports from Eire and £1bn of imports one sees that this is not a massive amount of trade to be regulated and to have agreements about content etc about. Once Eire has agreed that the foreign content of a Dell is, say, 40% of the value it is not necessary to have any more checks on their deliveries.
This. A hundred times this.
The EU spent the best part of a decade negotiating a trade deal with Canada, yet barely a fig leaf on financial services. Hell, they’ve not even completed their own single market in services which was promised years ago.
On topic I think May has no choice but to try to face this down. If she loses she probably has to resign and the government may well fall but she really cannot undertake the negotiations with the EU being held to ransom like this.
She is already being held to ransom by the Ultras.
At least the new bastards have a grip on reality...
You haven't, every day on here moaning,moaning, moaning, it's not fair,we were robbed, moaning, for f×ck sake man,grow a pair.
@LOS_Fisher: Keir Starmer on the kind of new customs union Labour want: "Will it do the work of the current customs union? Yes, that’s the intention." #marr
@BethRigby: Starmer confirms that customs unions shift in Labour policy; Want to remain in a customs union and EU will lead on trade talks post-Brexit. Clear blue water now between Labour and the Tories #marr
I’m convinced we will have an election, second referendum or change of government this year. The Tory rebels have tasted blood. They will bring down May’s government.
If the New Bastards rebel with the help of the Opposition, the ERG will rebel against whatever they've imposed and refuse to back the deal.
It just raises the overall prospect of no deal and the fall of the Government.
No deal will not happen. It would be disastrous for the economy in the near term as we’ve made no preparations, so it will not be allowed to happen.
Key to events is whether it is the customs union vote in May/June or the deal in itself that is rejected. If it’s the former, May can’t go for a referendum because there’s no agreement with the EU, so it would have to be a general election or letting Corbyn govern. I don’t think a change of Tory leader would solve things, especially if a Moggite won. A second referendum is much more likely once ‘the deal’ has been agreed in October. It would be quite feasible to have a referendum on that before the end of the year.
That sounds reasonable, provided any second referendum is on the “Noel Edmonds” question.
This from Hodges made me laugh: "May now has to find a way of neutralising the pincer movement being masterminded by the potentially lethal alliance of The Absolute Boy and The Absolute Soubry."
Mr. Slackbladder, that may very well be the intention of those seeking to keep us in the customs union. Get us a deal that they can take to the country claiming to be worse than the status quo, then ask for referendum 2.
Ostensibly, it seems a strange cause to be prepared to bring down the government (and end one's political career) over. (Snip)
Tell that to the Eurosceptic 'bastards' who helped bring down Major's government. .
Major’s second government served its full term.
You know what I mean! The party was at war with itself, thanks to the Eurosceptics, and that war hardly helped Major fight off the media assault on his government. If that very uncivil war had not happened, then Major still might not have won in 1997, but Labour would not have won such a stonking majority. Or perhaps there might have been another 1992-style surprise.
That majority Labour government was, I believe, bad for the country, and we are still living with its effects today.
One thing's for sure: Conservatives must be thanking their lucky stars that someone like Corbyn is at the helm of Labour, rather than another Blair. It's their only hope, and a poor hope at that.
Just suppose there was a by-election in a safe labour seat, Blair stood and won!
That's the funny thing: go back twenty years, and Major was being vilified and Blair canonised. Now, Major is much more warmly received, even amongst many Labour people, whilst Blair is hated by many on all sides. ANd especially by many Labourites (see BJO's post below).
Blair is yesterday's man. I'm far from sure he has anything of value to offer the country.
FYI - The Sunday Times also say there's only 3 Labour MPs who will definitely back the government in such a vote.
Hoey, Field, and Stringer.
The rest of the Labour Leavers are way too partisan and will not turn down the opportunity to topple Mrs May/the government.
When you couple it with this
Karen Bradley, the Northern Ireland secretary, warned May that the Democratic Unionists propping up the government should not be relied upon to “turn up” and vote to save her.
I expect that the DUP would do. This government suits them far better than any likely alternative.
@tnewtondunn: “Crunch time is coming for the Prime Minister on the Customs Union”, says Keir Starmer. As it is for Tory MPs. Will 15+ really collapse Govt’s negotiation? No10 don’t think so #Marr
FYI - The Sunday Times also say there's only 3 Labour MPs who will definitely back the government in such a vote.
Hoey, Field, and Stringer.
The rest of the Labour Leavers are way too partisan and will not turn down the opportunity to topple Mrs May/the government.
When you couple it with this
Karen Bradley, the Northern Ireland secretary, warned May that the Democratic Unionists propping up the government should not be relied upon to “turn up” and vote to save her.
If they abstain then, with the IRA, sorry SF, not being there the winning post is 309 or 308 allowing for the Speaker. If 3 Labour vote for the government May needs 306 which means she can afford 11 rebels (because who would want to rely on the Speaker?) If the Whips office can't get them below 11 when the future of the government is on the line its really not doing its job. Tight but winnable without the DUP, probably relatively easy with them.
I’m convinced we will have an election, second referendum or change of government this year. The Tory rebels have tasted blood. They will bring down May’s government.
If the New Bastards rebel with the help of the Opposition, the ERG will rebel against whatever they've imposed and refuse to back the deal.
It just raises the overall prospect of no deal and the fall of the Government.
No deal will not happen. It would be disastrous for the economy in the near term as we’ve made no preparations, so it will not be allowed to happen.
Key to events is whether it is the customs union vote in May/June or the deal in itself that is rejected. If it’s the former, May can’t go for a referendum because there’s no agreement with the EU, so it would have to be a general election or letting Corbyn govern. I don’t think a change of Tory leader would solve things, especially if a Moggite won. A second referendum is much more likely once ‘the deal’ has been agreed in October. It would be quite feasible to have a referendum on that before the end of the year.
A new leader could change things as a new leader would have authority, something that May distinctly lacks. Especially if (as it surely should) it goes to a membership vote.
The problem we have with May is that she never at any election even her leadership election stood clearly for what she was for, vague platitudes like "Brexit means Brexit" don't cut the mustard when it comes to getting a mandate.
If on the other hand we were to get a proper leadership contest with two candidates representing differing strands of Brexit - lets say for example Grieve versus Gove - then the winner would have a mandate to have the party unite behind them. It may not, but it may.
Mr. Slackbladder, that may very well be the intention of those seeking to keep us in the customs union. Get us a deal that they can take to the country claiming to be worse than the status quo, then ask for referendum 2.
Ostensibly, it seems a strange cause to be prepared to bring down the government (and end one's political career) over. (Snip)
Tell that to the Eurosceptic 'bastards' who helped bring down Major's government. .
Major’s second government served its full term.
You know what I mean! The party was at war with itself, thanks to the Eurosceptics, and that war hardly helped Major fight off the media assault on his government. If that very uncivil war had not happened, then Major still might not have won in 1997, but Labour would not have won such a stonking majority. Or perhaps there might have been another 1992-style surprise.
That majority Labour government was, I believe, bad for the country, and we are still living with its effects today.
One thing's for sure: Conservatives must be thanking their lucky stars that someone like Corbyn is at the helm of Labour, rather than another Blair. It's their only hope, and a poor hope at that.
Just suppose there was a by-election in a safe labour seat, Blair stood and won!
That's the funny thing: go back twenty years, and Major was being vilified and Blair canonised. Now, Major is much more warmly received, even amongst many Labour people, whilst Blair is hated by many on all sides. ANd especially by many Labourites (see BJO's post below).
Blair is yesterday's man. I'm far from sure he has anything of value to offer the country.
If for any reason we end up with a second referendum on the same question, then Blair has a huge role to play as the most prominent public face of the Remain side
FYI - The Sunday Times also say there's only 3 Labour MPs who will definitely back the government in such a vote.
Hoey, Field, and Stringer.
The rest of the Labour Leavers are way too partisan and will not turn down the opportunity to topple Mrs May/the government.
When you couple it with this
Karen Bradley, the Northern Ireland secretary, warned May that the Democratic Unionists propping up the government should not be relied upon to “turn up” and vote to save her.
That's funny. I thought the DUP had been bunged a billion quid in Ulster Bank notes precisely to do just that!
Mr. Slackbladder, that may very well be the intention of those seeking to keep us in the customs union. Get us a deal that they can take to the country claiming to be worse than the status quo, then ask for referendum 2.
Ostensibly, it seems a strange cause to be prepared to bring down the government (and end one's political career) over. (Snip)
Tell that to the Eurosceptic 'bastards' who helped bring down Major's government. .
Major’s second government served its full term.
You know what I mean! The party was at war with itself, thanks to the Eurosceptics, and that war hardly helped Major fight off the media assault on his government. If that very uncivil war had not happened, then Major still might not have won in 1997, but Labour would not have won such a stonking majority. Or perhaps there might have been another 1992-style surprise.
That majority Labour government was, I believe, bad for the country, and we are still living with its effects today.
One thing's for sure: Conservatives must be thanking their lucky stars that someone like Corbyn is at the helm of Labour, rather than another Blair. It's their only hope, and a poor hope at that.
In the context of a “government being brought down” its a non-trivial difference. TBH I think the biggest factor was “They’ve been in long enough, time to give the other lot a go (and that Mr Blair seems like a nice young man)”
Nah. The media assault on the Conservatives was relentless, and the Euroscepticism was not just a chink in their defensive wall; it was a blooming thirty-foot wide breach, where the rubble had fallen into the ditch to create a nice, pleasant walkway for the attackers. It's easy to attack when a number of the defenders are also attacking.
A united party might have much better withstood the assaults, or even stopped them happening in the first place.
FYI - The Sunday Times also say there's only 3 Labour MPs who will definitely back the government in such a vote.
Hoey, Field, and Stringer.
The rest of the Labour Leavers are way too partisan and will not turn down the opportunity to topple Mrs May/the government.
When you couple it with this
Karen Bradley, the Northern Ireland secretary, warned May that the Democratic Unionists propping up the government should not be relied upon to “turn up” and vote to save her.
If they abstain then, with the IRA, sorry SF, not being there the winning post is 309 or 308 allowing for the Speaker. If 3 Labour vote for the government May needs 306 which means she can afford 11 rebels (because who would want to rely on the Speaker?) If the Whips office can't get them below 11 when the future of the government is on the line its really not doing its job. Tight but winnable without the DUP, probably relatively easy with them.
Nobody can rely on The Speaker can you? I thought under the principles of how The Speaker votes then he must vote against amendments to a bill but ultimately against the government at third reading.
Mr. Slackbladder, that may very well be the intention of those seeking to keep us in the customs union. Get us a deal that they can take to the country claiming to be worse than the status quo, then ask for referendum 2.
Ostensibly, it seems a strange cause to be prepared to bring down the government (and end one's political career) over. (Snip)
Tell that to the Eurosceptic 'bastards' who helped bring down Major's government. .
Major’s second government served its full term.
You know what I mean! The party was at war with itself, thanks to the Eurosceptics, and that war hardly helped Major fight off the media assault on his government. If that very uncivil war had not happened, then Major still might not have won in 1997, but Labour would not have won such a stonking majority. Or perhaps there might have been another 1992-style surprise.
That majority Labour government was, I believe, bad for the country, and we are still living with its effects today.
One thing's for sure: Conservatives must be thanking their lucky stars that someone like Corbyn is at the helm of Labour, rather than another Blair. It's their only hope, and a poor hope at that.
Just suppose there was a by-election in a safe labour seat, Blair stood and won!
That's the funny thing: go back twenty years, and Major was being vilified and Blair canonised. Now, Major is much more warmly received, even amongst many Labour people, whilst Blair is hated by many on all sides. ANd especially by many Labourites (see BJO's post below).
Blair is yesterday's man. I'm far from sure he has anything of value to offer the country.
If for any reason we end up with a second referendum on the same question, then Blair has a huge role to play as the most prominent public face of the Remain side
FYI - The Sunday Times also say there's only 3 Labour MPs who will definitely back the government in such a vote.
Hoey, Field, and Stringer.
The rest of the Labour Leavers are way too partisan and will not turn down the opportunity to topple Mrs May/the government.
When you couple it with this
Karen Bradley, the Northern Ireland secretary, warned May that the Democratic Unionists propping up the government should not be relied upon to “turn up” and vote to save her.
If they abstain then, with the IRA, sorry SF, not being there the winning post is 309 or 308 allowing for the Speaker. If 3 Labour vote for the government May needs 306 which means she can afford 11 rebels (because who would want to rely on the Speaker?) If the Whips office can't get them below 11 when the future of the government is on the line its really not doing its job. Tight but winnable without the DUP, probably relatively easy with them.
I’m convinced we will have an election, second referendum or change of government this year. The Tory rebels have tasted blood. They will bring down May’s government.
If the New Bastards rebel with the help of the Opposition, the ERG will rebel against whatever they've imposed and refuse to back the deal.
It just raises the overall prospect of no deal and the fall of the Government.
No deal will not happen. It would be disastrous for the economy in the near term as we’ve made no preparations, so it will not be allowed to happen.
Key to events is whether it is the customs union vote in May/June or the deal in itself that is rejected. If it’s the former, May can’t go for a referendum because there’s no agreement with the EU, so it would have to be a general election or letting Corbyn govern. I don’t think a change of Tory leader would solve things, especially if a Moggite won. A second referendum is much more likely once ‘the deal’ has been agreed in October. It would be quite feasible to have a referendum on that before the end of the year.
A new leader could change things as a new leader would have authority, something that May distinctly lacks. Especially if (as it surely should) it goes to a membership vote.
The problem we have with May is that she never at any election even her leadership election stood clearly for what she was for, vague platitudes like "Brexit means Brexit" don't cut the mustard when it comes to getting a mandate.
If on the other hand we were to get a proper leadership contest with two candidates representing differing strands of Brexit - lets say for example Grieve versus Gove - then the winner would have a mandate to have the party unite behind them. It may not, but it may.
A Tory leadership election in the middle of the most difficult negotiations the country has undertaken in decades is just extra icing on the cake of this madness. God help us all.
@BethRigby: This from one Tory on Friday; “People don’t want to support Labour front bench but I think people are so frustrated now they might still do it” - adds that a vote in May on heels of a disastrous local elections might make it more tempting for some (London?) MPs #marr
@LizzyBuchan: Keir Starmer tells #Marr that Jeremy Corbyn will announce plans for a new customs treaty with the EU in speech tomorrow. It will 'do the work of the customs union'.
I’m convinced we will have an election, second referendum or change of government this year. The Tory rebels have tasted blood. They will bring down May’s government.
If the New Bastards rebel with the help of the Opposition, the ERG will rebel against whatever they've imposed and refuse to back the deal.
It just raises the overall prospect of no deal and the fall of the Government.
No deal will not happen. It would be disastrous for the economy in the near term as we’ve made no preparations, so it will not be allowed to happen.
Key to events is whether it is the customs union vote in May/June or the deal in itself that is rejected. If it’s the former, May can’t go for a referendum because there’s no agreement with the EU, so it would have to be a general election or letting Corbyn govern. I don’t think a change of Tory leader would solve things, especially if a Moggite won. A second referendum is much more likely once ‘the deal’ has been agreed in October. It would be quite feasible to have a referendum on that before the end of the year.
A new leader could change things as a new leader would have authority, something that May distinctly lacks. Especially if (as it surely should) it goes to a membership vote.
The problem we have with May is that she never at any election even her leadership election stood clearly for what she was for, vague platitudes like "Brexit means Brexit" don't cut the mustard when it comes to getting a mandate.
If on the other hand we were to get a proper leadership contest with two candidates representing differing strands of Brexit - lets say for example Grieve versus Gove - then the winner would have a mandate to have the party unite behind them. It may not, but it may.
A Tory leadership election in the middle of the most difficult negotiations the country has undertaken in decades is just extra icing on the cake of this madness. God help us all.
Agreed - it's what should have happened before the negotiations.
FYI - The Sunday Times also say there's only 3 Labour MPs who will definitely back the government in such a vote.
Hoey, Field, and Stringer.
The rest of the Labour Leavers are way too partisan and will not turn down the opportunity to topple Mrs May/the government.
When you couple it with this
Karen Bradley, the Northern Ireland secretary, warned May that the Democratic Unionists propping up the government should not be relied upon to “turn up” and vote to save her.
That's funny. I thought the DUP had been bunged a billion quid in Ulster Bank notes precisely to do just that!
They’ve not seen a penny of it yet, as it was sent to Stormont and there’s no-one there.
FYI - The Sunday Times also say there's only 3 Labour MPs who will definitely back the government in such a vote.
Hoey, Field, and Stringer.
The rest of the Labour Leavers are way too partisan and will not turn down the opportunity to topple Mrs May/the government.
When you couple it with this
Karen Bradley, the Northern Ireland secretary, warned May that the Democratic Unionists propping up the government should not be relied upon to “turn up” and vote to save her.
If they abstain then, with the IRA, sorry SF, not being there the winning post is 309 or 308 allowing for the Speaker. If 3 Labour vote for the government May needs 306 which means she can afford 11 rebels (because who would want to rely on the Speaker?) If the Whips office can't get them below 11 when the future of the government is on the line its really not doing its job. Tight but winnable without the DUP, probably relatively easy with them.
Nobody can rely on The Speaker can you? I thought under the principles of how The Speaker votes then he must vote against amendments to a bill but ultimately against the government at third reading.
Especially not this Speaker. Bercow, if he were still a regular MP, would be standing with Soubry and Grieve. He also doesn’t care for precident or convention, he’d be so happy with himself if he used his casting vote to defeat the government’s Brexit Bill.
" I thought it was A customs union , not The Customs Union ?"
You mean a cherry pick?
Ruled out, surely?
Not a cherry pick, it is the Turkish option
Of course it’s a cherry pick, it’s just that sometimes cherry picking is a delusion and sometimes it’s not. For some reason.
I think DavidL has called most of this right, frankly. This hamstrung approach cannot continue, yet clearly May does not have the numbers in parliament to go for the option the most significant bulk of her party is demanding. (As with labour someone might say the majority are not ultras, but as most go with the flow the only groups that matter are the ultras, those driving the agenda)
On topic I think May has no choice but to try to face this down. If she loses she probably has to resign and the government may well fall but she really cannot undertake the negotiations with the EU being held to ransom like this. She is clearly working hard to ensure that the Cabinet is backing her 100% and reaching out to as much of the party as possible. That is the right approach.
A Customs Union can differ from The Customs Union in terms of its universality. So the Customs Union with Turkey, for example, does not cover all goods and very little in the way of services. The problem I see with that is that if we don't have universality how does A Customs Union solve the NI problem? If the EU are really serious about the no pick and mix and reject the three basket proposal of the UK how is A Customs Union going to work or ever be agreed?
This is, I think, one of the reasons for the incredibly vague proposal that the rebels are putting forward. The practicalities in the time available are such that I think we either don't have a CU at all or we have The CU. I think they know that but are playing coy. What we really want is a FTA for both goods and services with an emphasis on reducing the inevitable friction arising from imported goods and goods with a significant third party contribution. Whether the EU are up for that remains to be seen but there were hopeful signs until this nonsense started.
I suspect you are right. May has to win this vote. But we'll probably end up in the Customs Union anyway. And very likely the Single Market too. Reality will win in the end.
If that were true then to hear some tell it the vote to leave would never have occurred. But then I’d be fine with a soft Brexit, depending on detail. I don’t see a way out of this mess unless labour switch to remain and a refight of the original battle is had.
Mr. Slackbladder, that may very well be the intention of those seeking to keep us in the customs union. Get us a deal that they can take to the country claiming to be worse than the status quo, then ask for referendum 2.
Ostensibly, it seems a strange cause to be prepared to bring down the government (and end one's political career) over. (Snip)
Tell that to the Eurosceptic 'bastards' who helped bring down Major's government. .
Major’s second government served its full term.
You know what I mean! The party was at war with itself, thanks to the Eurosceptics, and that war hardly helped Major fight off the media assault on his government. If that very uncivil war had not happened, then Major still might not have won in 1997, but Labour would not have won such a stonking majority. Or perhaps there might have been another 1992-style surprise.
That majority Labour government was, I believe, bad for the country, and we are still living with its effects today.
One thing's for sure: Conservatives must be thanking their lucky stars that someone like Corbyn is at the helm of Labour, rather than another Blair. It's their only hope, and a poor hope at that.
In the context of a “government being brought down” its a non-trivial difference. TBH I think the biggest factor was “They’ve been in long enough, time to give the other lot a go (and that Mr Blair seems like a nice young man)”
Nah. The media assault on the Conservatives was relentless, and the Euroscepticism was not just a chink in their defensive wall; it was a blooming thirty-foot wide breach, where the rubble had fallen into the ditch to create a nice, pleasant walkway for the attackers. It's easy to attack when a number of the defenders are also attacking.
A united party might have much better withstood the assaults, or even stopped them happening in the first place.
Good morning all.
My recollection of Major's premiership was that the Tories were just tired and worn down from such a lengthy spell in government. Whatever your politics, 18 years from one party followed by 13 years of another probably isn't healthy. It should be two terms max, then half time, oranges, swap ends.
@BethRigby: Starmer confirms that customs unions shift in Labour policy; Want to remain in a customs union and EU will lead on trade talks post-Brexit. Clear blue water now between Labour and the Tories #marr
Can’t wait for Corbyn vs Andrew Neil on what exactly he thinks a customs union is or how it functions.
Labour are only doing this because they scent a government defeat.
Mr. Slackbladder, that may very well be the intention of those seeking to keep us in the customs union. Get us a deal that they can take to the country claiming to be worse than the status quo, then ask for referendum 2.
Ostensibly, it seems a strange cause to be prepared to bring down the government (and end one's political career) over. (Snip)
Tell that to the Eurosceptic 'bastards' who helped bring down Major's government. .
Major’s second government served its full term.
You know what I mean! The party was at war with itself, thanks to the Eurosceptics, and that war hardly helped Major fight off the media assault on his government. If that very uncivil war had not happened, then Major still might not have won in 1997, but Labour would not have won such a stonking majority. Or perhaps there might have been another 1992-style surprise.
That majority Labour government was, I believe, bad for the country, and we are still living with its effects today.
One thing's for sure: Conservatives must be thanking their lucky stars that someone like Corbyn is at the helm of Labour, rather than another Blair. It's their only hope, and a poor hope at that.
In the context of a “government being brought down” its a non-trivial difference. TBH I think the biggest factor was “They’ve been in long enough, time to give the other lot a go (and that Mr Blair seems like a nice young man)”
Nah. The media assault on the Conservatives was relentless, and the Euroscepticism was not just a chink in their defensive wall; it was a blooming thirty-foot wide breach, where the rubble had fallen into the ditch to create a nice, pleasant walkway for the attackers. It's easy to attack when a number of the defenders are also attacking.
A united party might have much better withstood the assaults, or even stopped them happening in the first place.
Good morning all.
My recollection of Major's premiership was that the Tories were just tired and worn down from such a lengthy spell in government. Whatever your politics, 18 years from one party followed by 13 years of another probably isn't healthy. It should be two terms max, then half time, oranges, swap ends.
Bugger off.
That would have meant Kinnock replacing Thatcher in 1987.
FYI - The Sunday Times also say there's only 3 Labour MPs who will definitely back the government in such a vote.
Hoey, Field, and Stringer.
The rest of the Labour Leavers are way too partisan and will not turn down the opportunity to topple Mrs May/the government.
When you couple it with this
Karen Bradley, the Northern Ireland secretary, warned May that the Democratic Unionists propping up the government should not be relied upon to “turn up” and vote to save her.
If they abstain then, with the IRA, sorry SF, not being there the winning post is 309 or 308 allowing for the Speaker. If 3 Labour vote for the government May needs 306 which means she can afford 11 rebels (because who would want to rely on the Speaker?) If the Whips office can't get them below 11 when the future of the government is on the line its really not doing its job. Tight but winnable without the DUP, probably relatively easy with them.
Will Jared O’Mara be there?
I think we have been told that he is now hard at work. Probably another sex scandal in the making.
FYI - The Sunday Times also say there's only 3 Labour MPs who will definitely back the government in such a vote.
Hoey, Field, and Stringer.
The rest of the Labour Leavers are way too partisan and will not turn down the opportunity to topple Mrs May/the government.
When you couple it with this
Karen Bradley, the Northern Ireland secretary, warned May that the Democratic Unionists propping up the government should not be relied upon to “turn up” and vote to save her.
If they abstain then, with the IRA, sorry SF, not being there the winning post is 309 or 308 allowing for the Speaker. If 3 Labour vote for the government May needs 306 which means she can afford 11 rebels (because who would want to rely on the Speaker?) If the Whips office can't get them below 11 when the future of the government is on the line its really not doing its job. Tight but winnable without the DUP, probably relatively easy with them.
Will Jared O’Mara be there?
Or Kelvin Hopkins?
The Commons arithmetic is 326 for the Government, and 313 for the Opposition.
Add 3 Labour MP's, that's 329 to 310. So, ten Conservatives would have to switch. If Kelvin Hopkins isn't there, it's eleven.
FYI - The Sunday Times also say there's only 3 Labour MPs who will definitely back the government in such a vote.
Hoey, Field, and Stringer.
The rest of the Labour Leavers are way too partisan and will not turn down the opportunity to topple Mrs May/the government.
When you couple it with this
Karen Bradley, the Northern Ireland secretary, warned May that the Democratic Unionists propping up the government should not be relied upon to “turn up” and vote to save her.
If they abstain then, with the IRA, sorry SF, not being there the winning post is 309 or 308 allowing for the Speaker. If 3 Labour vote for the government May needs 306 which means she can afford 11 rebels (because who would want to rely on the Speaker?) If the Whips office can't get them below 11 when the future of the government is on the line its really not doing its job. Tight but winnable without the DUP, probably relatively easy with them.
Will Jared O’Mara be there?
Or Kelvin Hopkins?
The Commons arithmetic is 326 for the Government, and 313 for the Opposition.
Add 3 Labour MP's, that's 329 to 310. So, ten Conservatives would have to switch. If Kelvin Hopkins isn't there, it's eleven.
Incidentally, what, if anything, has happened, or is happening about Charlie Elphicke? Have a I missed something during my travels?
Another problem that arises from ACU or TCU going forward is that it is the EU who negotiates any future deals. Are we really wanting them to do that for us (even if they were willing)? Its been bad enough as a Member with deal after deal focussing on manufacturing and agriculture rather than access for our service industries. In theory we could come along too for the discussion but as long as we are tied to the EU by ACU or TCU we will have no negotiating position at all.
What does ACU give to the NI situation that a FTA doesn't? Well, for the classes of goods it covers we would not have to worry about external content so for those classes of goods the border is less of an issue. But if one considers the total trade between NI and the Republic is roughly £1.5bn of exports from Eire and £1bn of imports one sees that this is not a massive amount of trade to be regulated and to have agreements about content etc about. Once Eire has agreed that the foreign content of a Dell is, say, 40% of the value it is not necessary to have any more checks on their deliveries.
The advantage of CU is that it can be in place quickly, and solves the current deadlock. No arrangement need be permanent, and do not expect Labour and UKIP economic nationalists to be enthusiastic free traders with Trumpistan.
Mr. Slackbladder, that may very well be the intention of those seeking to keep us in the customs union. Get us a deal that they can take to the country claiming to be worse than the status quo, then ask for referendum 2.
Ostensibly, it seems a strange cause to be prepared to bring down the government (and end one's political career) over. (Snip)
Tell that to the Eurosceptic 'bastards' who helped bring down Major's government. .
Major’s second government served its full term.
You know what I mean! The party was at war with itself, thanks to the Eurosceptics, and that war hardly helped Major fight off the media assault on his government. If that very uncivil war had not happened, then Major still might not have won in 1997, but Labour would not have won such a stonking majority. Or perhaps there might have been another 1992-style surprise.
That majority Labour government was, I believe, bad for the country, and we are still living with its effects today.
One thing's for sure: Conservatives must be thanking their lucky stars that someone like Corbyn is at the helm of Labour, rather than another Blair. It's their only hope, and a poor hope at that.
In the context of a “government being brought down” its a non-trivial difference. TBH I think the biggest factor was “They’ve been in long enough, time to give the other lot a go (and that Mr Blair seems like a nice young man)”
Nah. The media assault on the Conservatives was relentless, and the Euroscepticism was not just a chink in their defensive wall; it was a blooming thirty-foot wide breach, where the rubble had fallen into the ditch to create a nice, pleasant walkway for the attackers. It's easy to attack when a number of the defenders are also attacking.
A united party might have much better withstood the assaults, or even stopped them happening in the first place.
Good morning all.
My recollection of Major's premiership was that the Tories were just tired and worn down from such a lengthy spell in government. Whatever your politics, 18 years from one party followed by 13 years of another probably isn't healthy. It should be two terms max, then half time, oranges, swap ends.
Bugger off.
That would have meant Kinnock replacing Thatcher in 1987.
You mean like the US? That’s working out well, isn’t it!
@tnewtondunn: Somewhat of an admission. Liam Fox now won’t say any new trade deals will be ready by end of transition period, just that “we want to take those talks as far as we can” #marr
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. It seems to me the problem the Tories have is that they no longer understand their reason to be,as defined by J.K Galbraith. This is the Tories' mission and they have been blown well of course into a sea of confusion caused by Brexit.
Mr. Slackbladder, that may very well be the intention of those seeking to keep us in the customs union. Get us a deal that they can take to the country claiming to be worse than the status quo, then ask for referendum 2.
Ostensibly, it seems a strange cause to be prepared to bring down the government (and end one's political career) over. (Snip)
Tell that to the Eurosceptic 'bastards' who helped bring down Major's government. .
Major’s second government served its full term.
You know what I mean! The party was at war with itself, thanks to the Eurosceptics, and that war hardly helped Major fight off the media assault on his government. If that very uncivil war had not happened, then Major still might not have won in 1997, but Labour would not have won such a stonking majority. Or perhaps there might have been another 1992-style surprise.
That majority Labour government was, I believe, bad for the country, and we are still living with its effects today.
One thing's for sure: Conservatives must be thanking their lucky stars that someone like Corbyn is at the helm of Labour, rather than another Blair. It's their only hope, and a poor hope at that.
In the context of a “government being brought down” its a non-trivial difference. TBH I think the biggest factor was “They’ve been in long enough, time to give the other lot a go (and that Mr Blair seems like a nice young man)”
Nah. The media assault on the Conservatives was relentless, and the Euroscepticism was not just a chink in their defensive wall; it was a blooming thirty-foot wide breach, where the rubble had fallen into the ditch to create a nice, pleasant walkway for the attackers. It's easy to attack when a number of the defenders are also attacking.
A united party might have much better withstood the assaults, or even stopped them happening in the first place.
Good morning all.
My recollection of Major's premiership was that the Tories were just tired and worn down from such a lengthy spell in government. Whatever your politics, 18 years from one party followed by 13 years of another probably isn't healthy. It should be two terms max, then half time, oranges, swap ends.
Bugger off.
That would have meant Kinnock replacing Thatcher in 1987.
I wasn't being entirely serious. But we might have avoided Gordon Brown altogether. On the other hand, Labour would be at the crease in 2007, which might have been sub-optimal.
You know what I mean! The party was at war with itself, thanks to the Eurosceptics, and that war hardly helped Major fight off the media assault on his government. If that very uncivil war had not happened, then Major still might not have won in 1997, but Labour would not have won such a stonking majority. Or perhaps there might have been another 1992-style surprise.
That majority Labour government was, I believe, bad for the country, and we are still living with its effects today.
One thing's for sure: Conservatives must be thanking their lucky stars that someone like Corbyn is at the helm of Labour, rather than another Blair. It's their only hope, and a poor hope at that.
In the context of a “government being brought down” its a non-trivial difference. TBH I think the biggest factor was “They’ve been in long enough, time to give the other lot a go (and that Mr Blair seems like a nice young man)”
Nah. The media assault on the Conservatives was relentless, and the Euroscepticism was not just a chink in their defensive wall; it was a blooming thirty-foot wide breach, where the rubble had fallen into the ditch to create a nice, pleasant walkway for the attackers. It's easy to attack when a number of the defenders are also attacking.
A united party might have much better withstood the assaults, or even stopped them happening in the first place.
Good morning all.
My recollection of Major's premiership was that the Tories were just tired and worn down from such a lengthy spell in government. Whatever your politics, 18 years from one party followed by 13 years of another probably isn't healthy. It should be two terms max, then half time, oranges, swap ends.
And we are now on target for 12 years of Tory rule, albeit completely without the kind of majorities both Thatcher and Blair enjoyed.
I think a reasonable inference is that there is a considerable advantage in incumbency and those who think a few months of chaos under Corbyn might be the answer to their prayers should be careful what they wish for.
FYI - The Sunday Times also say there's only 3 Labour MPs who will definitely back the government in such a vote.
Hoey, Field, and Stringer.
The rest of the Labour Leavers are way too partisan and will not turn down the opportunity to topple Mrs May/the government.
When you couple it with this
Karen Bradley, the Northern Ireland secretary, warned May that the Democratic Unionists propping up the government should not be relied upon to “turn up” and vote to save her.
If they abstain then, with the IRA, sorry SF, not being there the winning post is 309 or 308 allowing for the Speaker. If 3 Labour vote for the government May needs 306 which means she can afford 11 rebels (because who would want to rely on the Speaker?) If the Whips office can't get them below 11 when the future of the government is on the line its really not doing its job. Tight but winnable without the DUP, probably relatively easy with them.
Will Jared O’Mara be there?
Or Kelvin Hopkins?
The Commons arithmetic is 326 for the Government, and 313 for the Opposition.
Add 3 Labour MP's, that's 329 to 310. So, ten Conservatives would have to switch. If Kelvin Hopkins isn't there, it's eleven.
Hopkins could well be there and vote with the Tories.
Already being persona non grata in the Labour Party he has little to lose and he was one of the strongest Labour Eurosceptics prior to the referendum.
FYI - The Sunday Times also say there's only 3 Labour MPs who will definitely back the government in such a vote.
Hoey, Field, and Stringer.
The rest of the Labour Leavers are way too partisan and will not turn down the opportunity to topple Mrs May/the government.
When you couple it with this
Karen Bradley, the Northern Ireland secretary, warned May that the Democratic Unionists propping up the government should not be relied upon to “turn up” and vote to save her.
If they abstain then, with the IRA, sorry SF, not being there the winning post is 309 or 308 allowing for the Speaker. If 3 Labour vote for the government May needs 306 which means she can afford 11 rebels (because who would want to rely on the Speaker?) If the Whips office can't get them below 11 when the future of the government is on the line its really not doing its job. Tight but winnable without the DUP, probably relatively easy with them.
Will Jared O’Mara be there?
Or Kelvin Hopkins?
The Commons arithmetic is 326 for the Government, and 313 for the Opposition.
Add 3 Labour MP's, that's 329 to 310. So, ten Conservatives would have to switch. If Kelvin Hopkins isn't there, it's eleven.
Incidentally, what, if anything, has happened, or is happening about Charlie Elphicke? Have a I missed something during my travels?
Any Tory that puts putting Corbyn in ahead of any aspect of the EU be it for or against should probably be burnt alive deselected
If Hoey, Field, and Stringer puts the chance to get rid of the Tories below any aspect of the EU they should probably be burnt alive deselected
Given how often Corbyn voted with the Tories and against his own leadership when he was a backbencher he has a brass neck expecting loyalty from his backbenchers now.
The Tories are a shambles: we may as well stay in the SM/CU as this bodge, which the EU will probably reject anyway. I would very happily cheer if the Tories were to fall, were it not for the prospect of Corbyn being in power.
Anyway, off to do some gardening and then work out how to make my assets Corbyn proof.
The problem with the last election was that it was supposed to give a final verdict on Corbyn one way or the other, to reject him completely or perhaps elect him as prime minister. Instead it fell between the two options. It feels like we need another election to give the last word on the subject although it's Sod's Law the same thing would happen again — he'd do pretty well but not well enough to win.
Any Tory that puts putting Corbyn in ahead of any aspect of the EU be it for or against should probably be burnt alive deselected
If Hoey, Field, and Stringer puts the chance to get rid of the Tories below any aspect of the EU they should probably be burnt alive deselected
Party before country. Typical Labour.
Hardly a vice that Labour has a monopoly over.
Doesn't matter. They are the ones displaying it in all its glory at the moment. I may disagree completely with Soubry et al on this but they are at least doing what they think is right for the country not just what might keep them sweet with their party.
Any Tory that puts putting Corbyn in ahead of any aspect of the EU be it for or against should probably be burnt alive deselected
If Hoey, Field, and Stringer puts the chance to get rid of the Tories below any aspect of the EU they should probably be burnt alive deselected
Given how often Corbyn voted with the Tories and against his own leadership when he was a backbencher he has a brass neck expecting loyalty from his backbenchers now.
The Tories are a shambles: we may as well stay in the SM/CU as this bodge, which the EU will probably reject anyway. I would very happily cheer if the Tories were to fall, were it not for the prospect of Corbyn being in power.
Anyway, off to do some gardening and then work out how to make my assets Corbyn proof.
Have a good day all.
Enjoy! We're off to the Blackdowns to enjoy a beautiful crisp winter's day. Fortunately, we've already arranged matters to minimise the damage a Corbyn government might cause. A low pound would suit very well.
I expect the EU to tell the UK to sod off, here's your Canada vanilla deal. At some point there might be a fudge for the City. However, we plebeians are powerless, we'll just have to buckle up and try and enjoy the ride.
Working out how to vote on this would have torn me up.
I can’t risk making Corbyn PM but I don’t want to ruin the economy.
Although Liam Fox’s intervention this morning has cleared things up some what.
The motion itself is almost meaningless though. We could end up with a customs union on cars and car parts, planes and plane parts, wine and cheese, and almost nothing else. Any deal is subject to negotiation between the UK and the EU, even a Parliamentary vote can’t impose our will on someone else if they don’t agree to it.
If that were true then to hear some tell it the vote to leave would never have occurred. But then I’d be fine with a soft Brexit, depending on detail. I don’t see a way out of this mess unless labour switch to remain and a refight of the original battle is had.
There are no good Brexit outcomes. As a Remainer I am clear rejoining the EU isn't a good option either. We voted to reject EU membership. Democracy allows you to do dumb things but it needs to be respected. So we are looking for limiting the damage and the path of least resistance. Which I compute to be a form of the Single Market and the customs Union. I have no illusions that rule taking will be congenial. Every which way it's a mess.
So labour want a customs union but freedom for uk to have its own trade deals. Isn’t that a bit like trying to get the eu to agree to an opt out of freedom of movement ie it is totally against the core principles of the eu project and so ain’t going to happen.
@BethRigby: This from one Tory on Friday; “People don’t want to support Labour front bench but I think people are so frustrated now they might still do it” - adds that a vote in May on heels of a disastrous local elections might make it more tempting for some (London?) MPs #marr
Much can happen in two months, but I wouldn't expect the local elections to be disastrous, on the basis of current polls and local by-elections.
On topic I think May has no choice but to try to face this down. If she loses she probably has to resign and the government may well fall but she really cannot undertake the negotiations with the EU being held to ransom like this.
She is already being held to ransom by the Ultras.
At least the new bastards have a grip on reality...
She needs to face them down too. And, in fairness, so far she has.
So far David, I have yet to see her doing anything constructive. She just hides away hoping it will be OK. She has been as weak as ditchwater so far.
Working out how to vote on this would have torn me up.
I can’t risk making Corbyn PM but I don’t want to ruin the economy.
Although Liam Fox’s intervention this morning has cleared things up some what.
The motion itself is almost meaningless though. We could end up with a customs union on cars and car parts, planes and plane parts, wine and cheese, and almost nothing else. Any deal is subject to negotiation between the UK and the EU, even a Parliamentary vote can’t impose our will on someone else if they don’t agree to it.
What bit of the "NO Cherry Picking" message from EU did you not understand. They will take the hit before they blow up the EU. Far easier for 27 of them to weather it than UK.
The problem with the last election was that it was supposed to give a final verdict on Corbyn one way or the other, to reject him completely or perhaps elect him as prime minister. Instead it fell between the two options. It feels like we need another election to give the last word on the subject although it's Sod's Law the same thing would happen again — he'd do pretty well but not well enough to win.
That's not how I voted. I picked the one of the two potential governing parties that was least europhobic. Will carry on doing so until I think the Europe issue is settled.
Any Tory that puts putting Corbyn in ahead of any aspect of the EU be it for or against should probably be burnt alive deselected
If Hoey, Field, and Stringer puts the chance to get rid of the Tories below any aspect of the EU they should probably be burnt alive deselected
Party before country. Typical Labour.
Hardly a vice that Labour has a monopoly over.
Doesn't matter. They are the ones displaying it in all its glory at the moment. I may disagree completely with Soubry et al on this but they are at least doing what they think is right for the country not just what might keep them sweet with their party.
I'm minded to recall that the Conservative governments present appalling situation is the result of a completely unnecessary general election where the party interest overrode the national interest in the most base fashion.
On topic I think May has no choice but to try to face this down. If she loses she probably has to resign and the government may well fall but she really cannot undertake the negotiations with the EU being held to ransom like this.
She is already being held to ransom by the Ultras.
At least the new bastards have a grip on reality...
She needs to face them down too. And, in fairness, so far she has.
So far David, I have yet to see her doing anything constructive. She just hides away hoping it will be OK. She has been as weak as ditchwater so far.
She is in a weak position and consensus building is not something that comes naturally to her but the agreement at the end of phase 1 shows that she is not being held to ransom by the ultras as @Scott_P likes to pretend.
Working out how to vote on this would have torn me up.
I can’t risk making Corbyn PM but I don’t want to ruin the economy.
Although Liam Fox’s intervention this morning has cleared things up some what.
The motion itself is almost meaningless though. We could end up with a customs union on cars and car parts, planes and plane parts, wine and cheese, and almost nothing else. Any deal is subject to negotiation between the UK and the EU, even a Parliamentary vote can’t impose our will on someone else if they don’t agree to it.
That wouldn't be a Customs Union on WTO rules, which has to be "on substantially all trade". The Turkish - EU CU, which originated before the rule has a grandfathered obligation to incorporate primary agricultural products. If the UK wants to keep its sheep farmers in business it needs to stay in the CU, although there are other farmers - pork in particular - that would benefit from the barriers going up.
Gosh there's a lot of Corbyn supporters on here with money to burn. I would have thought they would be out there giving their money to the needy.
I think this article should be preserved and framed and cited in future as anexample of the utter fantasyworld inhabited by some pro Corbyn commentators.
Just to humour the author on one or two points.
The government would not fall, even if it lost a customs union vote. The government falls only if loses a vote of confidence.
In any case how on earth could Jeremy Corbyn govern on a day to day basis, let alone implement hard left socialism when he does not have the numbers to command any kind of majority?
If there were a general election, Jeremy Corbyn would almost certainly lose it on current polling (and we are assuming that the polls are not overstating Labour)
On EVERY occasion since 1945 without exception when Labour was in the lead in the polls during an election campaign, Labour has actually done worse than expected in terms of poll share as the law of self denying prophecy kicks in. This was true even of 1997 when Labour was polling nearly 50%
If that were repeated next time, given the narrowness of the Labour lead, Corbyn would lose.
I am sorry to let down the Corbyn wankathon but there are going to be a lot of red faces among the commentariat, in the Labour party, and on here when the results come through in the general election of 2022.
She is in a weak position and consensus building is not something that comes naturally to her but the agreement at the end of phase 1 shows that she is not being held to ransom by the ultras as @Scott_P likes to pretend.
Hah!
The fudge at the end of phase 1 was necessary to stop the Ultras toppling her.
If she had said "We don't have a phase 1 agreement, therefore we can't move on to phase 2" they would have let her stay in office for a minute?
Working out how to vote on this would have torn me up.
I can’t risk making Corbyn PM but I don’t want to ruin the economy.
Although Liam Fox’s intervention this morning has cleared things up some what.
The motion itself is almost meaningless though. We could end up with a customs union on cars and car parts, planes and plane parts, wine and cheese, and almost nothing else. Any deal is subject to negotiation between the UK and the EU, even a Parliamentary vote can’t impose our will on someone else if they don’t agree to it.
That wouldn't be a Customs Union on WTO rules, which has to be "on substantially all trade". The Turkish - EU CU, which originated before the rule has a grandfathered obligation to incorporate primary agricultural products. If the UK wants to keep its sheep farmers in business it needs to stay in the CU, although there are other farmers - pork in particular - that would benefit from the barriers going up.
Not true.
According to the NFU there is no Brexit outcome in terms of CU or SM membership that leaves sheep farmers worse off than they are now s long as the level of subsidy is maintained. It is only that loss of subsidy that makes a bad Brexit for livestock farmers.
Gosh there's a lot of Corbyn supporters on here with money to burn. I would have thought they would be out there giving their money to the needy.
I think this article should be preserved and framed and cited in future as anexample of the utter fantasyworld inhabited by some pro Corbyn commentators.
Just to humour the author on one or two points.
The government would not fall, even if it lost a customs union vote. The government falls only if loses a vote of confidence.
In any case how on earth could Jeremy Corbyn govern on a day to day basis, let alone implement hard left socialism when he does not have the numbers to command any kind of majority?
If there were a general election, Jeremy Corbyn would almost certainly lose it on current polling (and we are assuming that the polls are not overstating Labour)
On EVERY occasion since 1945 without exception when Labour was in the lead in the polls during an election campaign, Labour has actually done worse than expected in terms of poll share as the law of self denying prophecy kicks in. This was true even of 1997 when Labour was polling nearly 50%
If that were repeated next time, given the narrowness of the Labour lead, Corbyn would lose.
I am sorry to let down the Corbyn wankathon but there are going to be a lot of red faces among the commentariat, in the Labour party, and on here when the results come through in the general election of 2022.
In which universe am I pro Corbyn? As stated in the thread header I lose money if Corbyn becomes next PM.
You also think the government Chief Whip pro Corbyn when he raises the possibility of the government falling?
I don't understand the arguments against a customs union. HMRC need 5 years to be ready for not being in a customs union. And we don't have 5 years. How do "no customs union" advocates imagine the border will operate? And why do you know better than HMRC?
May's problem is this: ConKIP (led by Jacob Rees-Mogg) don't care about detail or practicalities. This is faith and belief, not practice and reality. They cannot and will not compromise their faith, and if May tries to force them they will write the letters and remove her. And at the end of that contest we may end up with a ConKIP MP where the faith becomes policy.
No matter how much her civil servants brief that hard brexit no CU simply will not work, she has no alternative but to pursue it anyway. Because if she doesn't someone else will. I don't see how the government falls though - MPs will vote confidence in her then hand in their letters of no confidence in her.
Gosh there's a lot of Corbyn supporters on here with money to burn. I would have thought they would be out there giving their money to the needy.
I think this article should be preserved and framed and cited in future as anexample of the utter fantasyworld inhabited by some pro Corbyn commentators.
Just to humour the author on one or two points.
The government would not fall, even if it lost a customs union vote. The government falls only if loses a vote of confidence.
In any case how on earth could Jeremy Corbyn govern on a day to day basis, let alone implement hard left socialism when he does not have the numbers to command any kind of majority?
If there were a general election, Jeremy Corbyn would almost certainly lose it on current polling (and we are assuming that the polls are not overstating Labour)
On EVERY occasion since 1945 without exception when Labour was in the lead in the polls during an election campaign, Labour has actually done worse than expected in terms of poll share as the law of self denying prophecy kicks in. This was true even of 1997 when Labour was polling nearly 50%
If that were repeated next time, given the narrowness of the Labour lead, Corbyn would lose.
I am sorry to let down the Corbyn wankathon but there are going to be a lot of red faces among the commentariat, in the Labour party, and on here when the results come through in the general election of 2022.
2022 will be as unique as 2017. Nobody knows how it will turn out.
So labour want a customs union but freedom for uk to have its own trade deals. Isn’t that a bit like trying to get the eu to agree to an opt out of freedom of movement ie it is totally against the core principles of the eu project and so ain’t going to happen.
Yep. Lets see how long it takes Labour to work that one out.
Gosh there's a lot of Corbyn supporters on here with money to burn. I would have thought they would be out there giving their money to the needy.
I think this article should be preserved and framed and cited in future as anexample of the utter fantasyworld inhabited by some pro Corbyn commentators.
Just to humour the author on one or two points.
The government would not fall, even if it lost a customs union vote. The government falls only if loses a vote of confidence.
In any case how on earth could Jeremy Corbyn govern on a day to day basis, let alone implement hard left socialism when he does not have the numbers to command any kind of majority?
If there were a general election, Jeremy Corbyn would almost certainly lose it on current polling (and we are assuming that the polls are not overstating Labour)
On EVERY occasion since 1945 without exception when Labour was in the lead in the polls during an election campaign, Labour has actually done worse than expected in terms of poll share as the law of self denying prophecy kicks in. This was true even of 1997 when Labour was polling nearly 50%
If that were repeated next time, given the narrowness of the Labour lead, Corbyn would lose.
I am sorry to let down the Corbyn wankathon but there are going to be a lot of red faces among the commentariat, in the Labour party, and on here when the results come through in the general election of 2022.
In which universe am I pro Corbyn?
You also think the government Chief Whip pro Corbyn when he raises the possibility of the government falling?
My other half said I looked very pale when the exit poll came in. Does the thought of Corbyn as PM not make you feel physically ill ?
Working out how to vote on this would have torn me up.
I can’t risk making Corbyn PM but I don’t want to ruin the economy.
Although Liam Fox’s intervention this morning has cleared things up some what.
The motion itself is almost meaningless though. We could end up with a customs union on cars and car parts, planes and plane parts, wine and cheese, and almost nothing else. Any deal is subject to negotiation between the UK and the EU, even a Parliamentary vote can’t impose our will on someone else if they don’t agree to it.
What bit of the "NO Cherry Picking" message from EU did you not understand. They will take the hit before they blow up the EU. Far easier for 27 of them to weather it than UK.
Okay, so let’s not bother with the negotiations. No deal it is.
You did but that was FAKE NEWS he is not in line for immediate reinstatement. I agree with the comment in the article you linked ie
"Livingstone demonstrably did not say "Adolf Hitler was a Zionist", he said Hitler briefly shared the same aims of Zionism by wanting to expel European Jews to then Palestine. His statement is as historically accurate as the Holocaust, as Livingstone was quoting the HOLOCAUST MUSEUM! Partisan and propagandising articles like this created the anti-semitic fallacy in the first place, and is specifically attacking Livingstone because he supports Corbyn and Palestine. This whole episode is pathetic and a smear against the former London Mayor whose community and religious bridging policies facilitated the dramatic reduction in attacks against the Jewish peoples of London"
I suspect conservative backbenchers will be uncomfortable when told by business that Corbyn's party is more economically coherent than they are, especially when they actually agree with the new Labour policy. May needs to win the vote for party management reasons, but it won't be the end of the matter.
Gosh there's a lot of Corbyn supporters on here with money to burn. I would have thought they would be out there giving their money to the needy.
I think this article should be preserved and framed and cited in future as anexample of the utter fantasyworld inhabited by some pro Corbyn commentators.
Just to humour the author on one or two points.
The government would not fall, even if it lost a customs union vote. The government falls only if loses a vote of confidence.
In any case how on earth could Jeremy Corbyn govern on a day to day basis, let alone implement hard left socialism when he does not have the numbers to command any kind of majority?
If there were a general election, Jeremy Corbyn would almost certainly lose it on current polling (and we are assuming that the polls are not overstating Labour)
On EVERY occasion since 1945 without exception when Labour was in the lead in the polls during an election campaign, Labour has actually done worse than expected in terms of poll share as the law of self denying prophecy kicks in. This was true even of 1997 when Labour was polling nearly 50%
If that were repeated next time, given the narrowness of the Labour lead, Corbyn would lose.
I am sorry to let down the Corbyn wankathon but there are going to be a lot of red faces among the commentariat, in the Labour party, and on here when the results come through in the general election of 2022.
In which universe am I pro Corbyn?
You also think the government Chief Whip pro Corbyn when he raises the possibility of the government falling?
My other half said I looked very pale when the exit poll came in. Does the thought of Corbyn as PM not make you feel physically ill ?
Why? Which bits of the best Manifesto since 1948 make you feel physically sick?
Gosh there's a lot of Corbyn supporters on here with money to burn. I would have thought they would be out there giving their money to the needy.
I think this article should be preserved and framed and cited in future as anexample of the utter fantasyworld inhabited by some pro Corbyn commentators.
Just to humour the author on one or two points.
The government would not fall, even if it lost a customs union vote. The government falls only if loses a vote of confidence.
In any case how on earth could Jeremy Corbyn govern on a day to day basis, let alone implement hard left socialism when he does not have the numbers to command any kind of majority?
If there were a general election, Jeremy Corbyn would almost certainly lose it on current polling (and we are assuming that the polls are not overstating Labour)
On EVERY occasion since 1945 without exception when Labour was in the lead in the polls during an election campaign, Labour has actually done worse than expected in terms of poll share as the law of self denying prophecy kicks in. This was true even of 1997 when Labour was polling nearly 50%
If that were repeated next time, given the narrowness of the Labour lead, Corbyn would lose.
I am sorry to let down the Corbyn wankathon but there are going to be a lot of red faces among the commentariat, in the Labour party, and on here when the results come through in the general election of 2022.
In which universe am I pro Corbyn?
You also think the government Chief Whip pro Corbyn when he raises the possibility of the government falling?
My other half said I looked very pale when the exit poll came in. Does the thought of Corbyn as PM not make you feel physically ill ?
There’s been only two occasions in my life that politics has made me come close to vomiting/being sick.
1) When David Cameron’s voice quivered as he was announcing his resignation. God only knows how I kept it together.
2) When I was writing this thread in the early hours of June 9th.
Gosh there's a lot of Corbyn supporters on here with money to burn. I would have thought they would be out there giving their money to the needy.
I think this article should be preserved and framed and cited in future as anexample of the utter fantasyworld inhabited by some pro Corbyn commentators.
Just to humour the author on one or two points.
The government would not fall, even if it lost a customs union vote. The government falls only if loses a vote of confidence.
In any case how on earth could Jeremy Corbyn govern on a day to day basis, let alone implement hard left socialism when he does not have the numbers to command any kind of majority?
If there were a general election, Jeremy Corbyn would almost certainly lose it on current polling (and we are assuming that the polls are not overstating Labour)
On EVERY occasion since 1945 without exception when Labour was in the lead in the polls during an election campaign, Labour has actually done worse than expected in terms of poll share as the law of self denying prophecy kicks in. This was true even of 1997 when Labour was polling nearly 50%
If that were repeated next time, given the narrowness of the Labour lead, Corbyn would lose.
I am sorry to let down the Corbyn wankathon but there are going to be a lot of red faces among the commentariat, in the Labour party, and on here when the results come through in the general election of 2022.
As white as yours at 10pm GE 2017 or let me guess a more Tory Lite leader would have won
So labour want a customs union but freedom for uk to have its own trade deals. Isn’t that a bit like trying to get the eu to agree to an opt out of freedom of movement ie it is totally against the core principles of the eu project and so ain’t going to happen.
That wasn't what Kier Starmer said on Marr this morning. He said we can do better deals jointly as part of the EU than we can do on our own. Common sense when you think about it.
Interestingly, Verstappen's odds on Betfair have lengthened to 8. Not tempted given my existing positions, but if I were starting from zero I'd give it some thought (I'm green on Red Bull at 9.2).
Gosh there's a lot of Corbyn supporters on here with money to burn. I would have thought they would be out there giving their money to the needy.
I think this article should be preserved and framed and cited in future as anexample of the utter fantasyworld inhabited by some pro Corbyn commentators.
Just to humour the author on one or two points.
The government would not fall, even if it lost a customs union vote. The government falls only if loses a vote of confidence.
In any case how on earth could Jeremy Corbyn govern on a day to day basis, let alone implement hard left socialism when he does not have the numbers to command any kind of majority?
If there were a general election, Jeremy Corbyn would almost certainly lose it on current polling (and we are assuming that the polls are not overstating Labour)
On EVERY occasion since 1945 without exception when Labour was in the lead in the polls during an election campaign, Labour has actually done worse than expected in terms of poll share as the law of self denying prophecy kicks in. This was true even of 1997 when Labour was polling nearly 50%
If that were repeated next time, given the narrowness of the Labour lead, Corbyn would lose.
I am sorry to let down the Corbyn wankathon but there are going to be a lot of red faces among the commentariat, in the Labour party, and on here when the results come through in the general election of 2022.
In which universe am I pro Corbyn?
You also think the government Chief Whip pro Corbyn when he raises the possibility of the government falling?
My other half said I looked very pale when the exit poll came in. Does the thought of Corbyn as PM not make you feel physically ill ?
Why? Which bits of the best Manifesto since 1948 make you feel physically sick?
Oh the Tory manifesto made me also feel quite sick. Fortunately there was no majority for it. But not as ill as the thought of McD having his hands on the tiller.
Comments
If you want Brexit to work you are going to have to work a lot harder than coming up with some clever rhetoric. The UK has to consistently do better economically than the EU or the already high level of pressure to rejoin will become irresistible.
Key to events is whether it is the customs union vote in May/June or the deal in itself that is rejected. If it’s the former, May can’t go for a referendum because there’s no agreement with the EU, so it would have to be a general election or letting Corbyn govern. I don’t think a change of Tory leader would solve things, especially if a Moggite won. A second referendum is much more likely once ‘the deal’ has been agreed in October. It would be quite feasible to have a referendum on that before the end of the year.
That majority Labour government was, I believe, bad for the country, and we are still living with its effects today.
One thing's for sure: Conservatives must be thanking their lucky stars that someone like Corbyn is at the helm of Labour, rather than another Blair. It's their only hope, and a poor hope at that.
Hoey, Field, and Stringer.
The rest of the Labour Leavers are way too partisan and will not turn down the opportunity to topple Mrs May/the government.
When you couple it with this
Karen Bradley, the Northern Ireland secretary, warned May that the Democratic Unionists propping up the government should not be relied upon to “turn up” and vote to save her.
The EU spent the best part of a decade negotiating a trade deal with Canada, yet barely a fig leaf on financial services. Hell, they’ve not even completed their own single market in services which was promised years ago.
On the NI situation, the big trucks will all file electronic paperwork and the small ones will get randomly spot checked as they do now. The EU really don’t want an electronic border, as they think it will be to our advantage - they’re shit-scared that Brexit will be a success.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/02/24/smart-borders-brexit-will-give-britain-extra-advantage-eu-commissioned/
If he has denied it (which he has) he is a liar it happened right in front of me.
Michael Woolf - Marr
Not exactly news that the leader of the war criminal party. lies his ass off!!!
This from Hodges made me laugh: "May now has to find a way of neutralising the pincer movement being masterminded by the potentially lethal alliance of The Absolute Boy and The Absolute Soubry."
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-5431527/Theresa-control-one-way-says-Dan-Hodges.html
Blair is yesterday's man. I'm far from sure he has anything of value to offer the country.
3 Labour MP's may make all the difference.
The problem we have with May is that she never at any election even her leadership election stood clearly for what she was for, vague platitudes like "Brexit means Brexit" don't cut the mustard when it comes to getting a mandate.
If on the other hand we were to get a proper leadership contest with two candidates representing differing strands of Brexit - lets say for example Grieve versus Gove - then the winner would have a mandate to have the party unite behind them. It may not, but it may.
A united party might have much better withstood the assaults, or even stopped them happening in the first place.
I think DavidL has called most of this right, frankly. This hamstrung approach cannot continue, yet clearly May does not have the numbers in parliament to go for the option the most significant bulk of her party is demanding. (As with labour someone might say the majority are not ultras, but as most go with the flow the only groups that matter are the ultras, those driving the agenda) If that were true then to hear some tell it the vote to leave would never have occurred. But then I’d be fine with a soft Brexit, depending on detail. I don’t see a way out of this mess unless labour switch to remain and a refight of the original battle is had.
My recollection of Major's premiership was that the Tories were just tired and worn down from such a lengthy spell in government. Whatever your politics, 18 years from one party followed by 13 years of another probably isn't healthy. It should be two terms max, then half time, oranges, swap ends.
Labour are only doing this because they scent a government defeat.
https://twitter.com/DanielJHannan/status/967009336118726656
That would have meant Kinnock replacing Thatcher in 1987.
The Commons arithmetic is 326 for the Government, and 313 for the Opposition.
Add 3 Labour MP's, that's 329 to 310. So, ten Conservatives would have to switch. If Kelvin Hopkins isn't there, it's eleven.
I get they scent a government defeat on the CU. But will be interesting to see how that line plays out in public
It seems to me the problem the Tories have is that they no longer understand their reason to be,as defined by J.K Galbraith.
This is the Tories' mission and they have been blown well of course into a sea of confusion caused by Brexit.
I think a reasonable inference is that there is a considerable advantage in incumbency and those who think a few months of chaos under Corbyn might be the answer to their prayers should be careful what they wish for.
Already being persona non grata in the Labour Party he has little to lose and he was one of the strongest Labour Eurosceptics prior to the referendum.
Happy days ....
Working out how to vote on this would have torn me up.
I can’t risk making Corbyn PM but I don’t want to ruin the economy.
Although Liam Fox’s intervention this morning has cleared things up some what.
The Tories are a shambles: we may as well stay in the SM/CU as this bodge, which the EU will probably reject anyway. I would very happily cheer if the Tories were to fall, were it not for the prospect of Corbyn being in power.
Anyway, off to do some gardening and then work out how to make my assets Corbyn proof.
Have a good day all.
I expect the EU to tell the UK to sod off, here's your Canada vanilla deal. At some point there might be a fudge for the City. However, we plebeians are powerless, we'll just have to buckle up and try and enjoy the ride.
I think this article should be preserved and framed and cited in future as anexample of the utter fantasyworld inhabited by some pro Corbyn commentators.
Just to humour the author on one or two points.
The government would not fall, even if it lost a customs union vote. The government falls only if loses a vote of confidence.
In any case how on earth could Jeremy Corbyn govern on a day to day basis, let alone implement hard left socialism when he does not have the numbers to command any kind of majority?
If there were a general election, Jeremy Corbyn would almost certainly lose it on current polling (and we are assuming that the polls are not overstating Labour)
On EVERY occasion since 1945 without exception when Labour was in the lead in the polls during an election campaign, Labour has actually done worse than expected in terms of poll share as the law of self denying prophecy kicks in. This was true even of 1997 when Labour was polling nearly 50%
If that were repeated next time, given the narrowness of the Labour lead, Corbyn would lose.
I am sorry to let down the Corbyn wankathon but there are going to be a lot of red faces among the commentariat, in the Labour party, and on here when the results come through in the general election of 2022.
The fudge at the end of phase 1 was necessary to stop the Ultras toppling her.
If she had said "We don't have a phase 1 agreement, therefore we can't move on to phase 2" they would have let her stay in office for a minute?
Dream on...
According to the NFU there is no Brexit outcome in terms of CU or SM membership that leaves sheep farmers worse off than they are now s long as the level of subsidy is maintained. It is only that loss of subsidy that makes a bad Brexit for livestock farmers.
You also think the government Chief Whip pro Corbyn when he raises the possibility of the government falling?
May's problem is this: ConKIP (led by Jacob Rees-Mogg) don't care about detail or practicalities. This is faith and belief, not practice and reality. They cannot and will not compromise their faith, and if May tries to force them they will write the letters and remove her. And at the end of that contest we may end up with a ConKIP MP where the faith becomes policy.
No matter how much her civil servants brief that hard brexit no CU simply will not work, she has no alternative but to pursue it anyway. Because if she doesn't someone else will. I don't see how the government falls though - MPs will vote confidence in her then hand in their letters of no confidence in her.
"Livingstone demonstrably did not say "Adolf Hitler was a Zionist", he said Hitler briefly shared the same aims of Zionism by wanting to expel European Jews to then Palestine. His statement is as historically accurate as the Holocaust, as Livingstone was quoting the HOLOCAUST MUSEUM! Partisan and propagandising articles like this created the anti-semitic fallacy in the first place, and is specifically attacking Livingstone because he supports Corbyn and Palestine. This whole episode is pathetic and a smear against the former London Mayor whose community and religious bridging policies facilitated the dramatic reduction in attacks against the Jewish peoples of London"
the matter.
1) When David Cameron’s voice quivered as he was announcing his resignation. God only knows how I kept it together.
2) When I was writing this thread in the early hours of June 9th.
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2017/06/09/if-youre-not-mentally-prepared-for-corbyn-as-prime-minister-then-you-should-be/
I think it might give Stevef an aneurysm.
It does contain a reference to the alternative vote system.
http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2018/02/early-pre-season-musings.html
Interestingly, Verstappen's odds on Betfair have lengthened to 8. Not tempted given my existing positions, but if I were starting from zero I'd give it some thought (I'm green on Red Bull at 9.2).