politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Punters now make it a 32% chance that TMay will be out this ye

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Punters now make it a 32% chance that TMay will be out this year

With all the machination that are going on within the cabinet over the divisions on Brexit it is perhaps no wonder that here has been renewed interest on betting that she’ll be out this year.

Read the full story here

surby

What are the odds on a general election this year ?

TheScreamingEagles

Stick to your guns Theresa and give them soft Brexit.

SandyRentool

To leave office this year, Tezzie would have to announce her departure or lose an MP ballot by party conference at the latest.

HYUFD

May remains the best choice to hold Brexiteers and Remainers together.

Regarding her campaigning skills also do not forget she still got the highest Tory voteshare since Thatcher in 1983 despite the dementia tax debacle and Merkel for example failed to win a majority for her Coalition on her first attempt but did do on her second

TheScreamingEagles

SandyRentool said:

To leave office this year, Tezzie would have to announce her departure or lose an MP ballot by party conference at the latest.

Nah, Dave's successor was sorted 17 days after Dave announced his retirement.

Michael Howard was confirmed as successor to IDS within a week of the VONC.

Tissue_Price

Leaving aside the identity of the successor, what date would give the Conservative Party the best chance of success at the next [assume 2022] election? I reckon autumn 2020, along the liens of John Major. Long enough to impress, change some policies / emphasis, but short enough so that the electorate don't get too bored.

Not that this will necessarily affect the timing.

Sunil_Prasannan

So it's a 68% chance she will stay?

TheScreamingEagles

Tissue_Price said:

Leaving aside the identity of the successor, what date would give the Conservative Party the best chance of success at the next [assume 2022] election? I reckon autumn 2020, along the liens of John Major. Long enough to impress, change some policies / emphasis, but short enough so that the electorate don't get too bored.

Not that this will necessarily affect the timing.

I agree with that.

Dave's original plan was to stand down by Autumn 2019 to give his successor time to bed in for the 2020 general election.

So eight months minimum and 20 months max.

Sunil_Prasannan

Tissue_Price said:

Leaving aside the identity of the successor, what date would give the Conservative Party the best chance of success at the next [assume 2022] election? I reckon autumn 2020, along the liens of John Major. Long enough to impress, change some policies / emphasis, but short enough so that the electorate don't get too bored.

Not that this will necessarily affect the timing.

Major had to call an election in '92 because the previous one was in '87.

surby

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Tissue_Price said:

Leaving aside the identity of the successor, what date would give the Conservative Party the best chance of success at the next [assume 2022] election? I reckon autumn 2020, along the liens of John Major. Long enough to impress, change some policies / emphasis, but short enough so that the electorate don't get too bored.

Not that this will necessarily affect the timing.

Major had to call an election in '92 because the previous one was in '87.

But he delayed it to the last possible date.

rottenborough

surby said:

What are the odds on a general election this year ?

10% approx, according to BF punters.

TheScreamingEagles

surby said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Tissue_Price said:

Leaving aside the identity of the successor, what date would give the Conservative Party the best chance of success at the next [assume 2022] election? I reckon autumn 2020, along the liens of John Major. Long enough to impress, change some policies / emphasis, but short enough so that the electorate don't get too bored.

Not that this will necessarily affect the timing.

Major had to call an election in '92 because the previous one was in '87.

But he delayed it to the last possible date.

Nope, the last possible date was June 1992

Gardenwalker

Superb article about exploitation in the Leicester garment making industry. A must read.

https://twitter.com/sarahoconnor_/status/997032514823770112?s=21

rottenborough

Wow!

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/997153932232351744

MaxPB

rottenborough said:

Wow!

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/997153932232351744

He's got a point. The Times seems to be the only quality paper not to see a huge drop in circulation. Part of that has to be because of the paywall.

AlastairMeeks

Newspapers made a huge mistake when they cleared out all the journalists and retained all the expensive op-ed writers. Reasonably good writers are plentiful. In order to provide a point of difference, newspapers need to supply something which the public can't get relatively easily elsewhere. In the case of newspapers, that something is news. That needs the fact-finders - the journalists.

RobD

AlastairMeeks said:

Newspapers made a huge mistake when they cleared out all the journalists and retained all the expensive op-ed writers. Reasonably good writers are plentiful. In order to provide a point of difference, newspapers need to supply something which the public can't get relatively easily elsewhere. In the case of newspapers, that something is news. That needs the fact-finders - the journalists.

Compare and contrast the Guardian with the Telegraph.

williamglenn

FPT

rcs1000 said:

I think the fracturing of the EU between those who want to join a superstate and those who do not was inevitable from the creation of the Euro. The mistake the EU made - to my mind - was in failing to realise this, and thinking it was merely about speeds of convergence. This led them to fail to put in place proper structures for those outside the Eurozone.

Going back to Gardenwalker's post, I think the idea of a Eurozone/non-Eurozone split is another one of those delusions. Probably it will endure until Hungary and Poland join.

AlastairMeeks

RobD said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Newspapers made a huge mistake when they cleared out all the journalists and retained all the expensive op-ed writers. Reasonably good writers are plentiful. In order to provide a point of difference, newspapers need to supply something which the public can't get relatively easily elsewhere. In the case of newspapers, that something is news. That needs the fact-finders - the journalists.

Compare and contrast the Guardian with the Telegraph.

The next step would be to create modular online newspapers - the Daily Me that was once imagined. I could pay to choose daily news on London, Hungary, Northern Ireland, pensions, polling, archaeology etc etc, tailoring an online newspaper that met my priorities rather than be given a lump of information some of which interests me and some of which does not.

But that would need an extensive bank of content daily, which newspapers by and large have chosen to eschew obtaining.

RobD

AlastairMeeks said:

RobD said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Newspapers made a huge mistake when they cleared out all the journalists and retained all the expensive op-ed writers. Reasonably good writers are plentiful. In order to provide a point of difference, newspapers need to supply something which the public can't get relatively easily elsewhere. In the case of newspapers, that something is news. That needs the fact-finders - the journalists.

Compare and contrast the Guardian with the Telegraph.

The next step would be to create modular online newspapers - the Daily Me that was once imagined. I could pay to choose daily news on London, Hungary, Northern Ireland, pensions, polling, archaeology etc etc, tailoring an online newspaper that met my priorities rather than be given a lump of information some of which interests me and some of which does not.

But that would need an extensive bank of content daily, which newspapers by and large have chosen to eschew obtaining.

That't basically reddit after you have subscribed to the subreddits you are interested in (and removed those that don't interest you).

AlastairMeeks

On topic, I'd have said that Theresa May actually looks more secure in the short term than she has done for a long time. It has become apparent that the ERG nutjobs might have the numbers to call a vote of confidence but they don't have the numbers to oust her. Their bluff is being called now and they are sulkily backing down.

2019 is a different story but 2019 is a lifetime away yet.

RoyalBlue

Gardenwalker said:

Superb article about exploitation in the Leicester garment making industry. A must read.

https://twitter.com/sarahoconnor_/status/997032514823770112?s=21

I cannot recommend this article enough. It is a stark indictment of the naivety, wishful thinking and wilful blindness of many public sector agencies and the police to crimes committed by those with one or more ‘protected characteristics’.

It is bitterly ironic that in the age of the Equality Act, our public authorities are effectually abandoning the rule of law in certain parts of the country.

HYUFD

williamglenn said:

FPT

rcs1000 said:

I think the fracturing of the EU between those who want to join a superstate and those who do not was inevitable from the creation of the Euro. The mistake the EU made - to my mind - was in failing to realise this, and thinking it was merely about speeds of convergence. This led them to fail to put in place proper structures for those outside the Eurozone.

Going back to Gardenwalker's post, I think the idea of a Eurozone/non-Eurozone split is another one of those delusions. Probably it will endure until Hungary and Poland join.

Polls in both Poland and Hungary show big majorities against joining the Euro and the populist right wing governments in both countries are in no rush to join either

MaxPB

It will be interesting to see how Eastern Europe reacts to the new cohesion funds distribution criteria. I think without that annual bribe to stay we may see a few of them decide it's not worth the hassle.

TheScreamingEagles

Probably just seen the greatest ever catch in cricket by AB de Villiers.

williamglenn

HYUFD said:

williamglenn said:

FPT

rcs1000 said:

I think the fracturing of the EU between those who want to join a superstate and those who do not was inevitable from the creation of the Euro. The mistake the EU made - to my mind - was in failing to realise this, and thinking it was merely about speeds of convergence. This led them to fail to put in place proper structures for those outside the Eurozone.

Going back to Gardenwalker's post, I think the idea of a Eurozone/non-Eurozone split is another one of those delusions. Probably it will endure until Hungary and Poland join.

Polls in both Poland and Hungary show big majorities against joining the Euro and the populist right wing governments in both countries are in no rush to join either

https://twitter.com/EuropeElects/status/943494548172496901

HYUFD

williamglenn said:

HYUFD said:

williamglenn said:

FPT

rcs1000 said:

I think the fracturing of the EU between those who want to join a superstate and those who do not was inevitable from the creation of the Euro. The mistake the EU made - to my mind - was in failing to realise this, and thinking it was merely about speeds of convergence. This led them to fail to put in place proper structures for those outside the Eurozone.

Going back to Gardenwalker's post, I think the idea of a Eurozone/non-Eurozone split is another one of those delusions. Probably it will endure until Hungary and Poland join.

Polls in both Poland and Hungary show big majorities against joining the Euro and the populist right wing governments in both countries are in no rush to join either

https://twitter.com/EuropeElects/status/943494548172496901

In Poland 77% oppose the Euro

https://mobile.twitter.com/EuropeElects/status/949647021480214528

Though Hungarian voters may be more enthusiastic, Hungarian PM Orban has said 'Hungary will not join the Euro for many decades to come'

http://hungarianfreepress.com/2015/06/03/orban-hungary-will-not-adopt-the-euro-for-many-decades-to-come/

another_richard

Gardenwalker said:

Superb article about exploitation in the Leicester garment making industry. A must read.

https://twitter.com/sarahoconnor_/status/997032514823770112?s=21

It is a good read and revealing of the authorities tolerance towards and businesses exploitation of illegal working practices.

There will be similar happening in agriculture, construction and various low grade service sectors.

Anazina

Lovely picture of May, Macron and Merkel in tonight’s Standard. Sharing a joke - no doubt Brexit related!

another_richard

TheScreamingEagles said:

surby said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Tissue_Price said:

Leaving aside the identity of the successor, what date would give the Conservative Party the best chance of success at the next [assume 2022] election? I reckon autumn 2020, along the liens of John Major. Long enough to impress, change some policies / emphasis, but short enough so that the electorate don't get too bored.

Not that this will necessarily affect the timing.

Major had to call an election in '92 because the previous one was in '87.

But he delayed it to the last possible date.

Nope, the last possible date was June 1992

Couldn't it technically have been delayed until July 1992 in the same way the April 1992 election was followed by one in May 1997.

williamglenn

HYUFD said:

Though Hungarian voters may be more enthusiastic, Hungarian PM Orban has said 'Hungary will not join the Euro for many decades to come'

http://hungarianfreepress.com/2015/06/03/orban-hungary-will-not-adopt-the-euro-for-many-decades-to-come/

Here's a more up to date article for you:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-10-05/skeptic-hungary-can-t-resist-euro-pull-forever-top-banker-says

Hungary may adopt the euro sooner than its government is willing to admit, as Europe’s renewed integration drive pulls even countries reluctant to join into the common currency, the nation’s top banker said.

rcs1000

another_richard said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

surby said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Tissue_Price said:

Leaving aside the identity of the successor, what date would give the Conservative Party the best chance of success at the next [assume 2022] election? I reckon autumn 2020, along the liens of John Major. Long enough to impress, change some policies / emphasis, but short enough so that the electorate don't get too bored.

Not that this will necessarily affect the timing.

Major had to call an election in '92 because the previous one was in '87.

But he delayed it to the last possible date.

Nope, the last possible date was June 1992

Couldn't it technically have been delayed until July 1992 in the same way the April 1992 election was followed by one in May 1997.

I think that's absolutely right.

rcs1000

RobD said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Newspapers made a huge mistake when they cleared out all the journalists and retained all the expensive op-ed writers. Reasonably good writers are plentiful. In order to provide a point of difference, newspapers need to supply something which the public can't get relatively easily elsewhere. In the case of newspapers, that something is news. That needs the fact-finders - the journalists.

Compare and contrast the Guardian with the Telegraph.

The Guardian is head and shoulders above other UK papers in terms of journalism.

Bromptonaut

Can. Kick. Road.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44148027

TheScreamingEagles

another_richard said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

surby said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Tissue_Price said:

Leaving aside the identity of the successor, what date would give the Conservative Party the best chance of success at the next [assume 2022] election? I reckon autumn 2020, along the liens of John Major. Long enough to impress, change some policies / emphasis, but short enough so that the electorate don't get too bored.

Not that this will necessarily affect the timing.

Major had to call an election in '92 because the previous one was in '87.

But he delayed it to the last possible date.

Nope, the last possible date was June 1992

Couldn't it technically have been delayed until July 1992 in the same way the April 1992 election was followed by one in May 1997.

I thought Parliament reconvened in June 1987 ruling out a July 1992 election.

IIRC John Major didn't want the election to coincide with Euro 1992 remembering the government losing the 1970 election and the blame being put on England losing a few days before polling day.

rcs1000

HYUFD said:

williamglenn said:

FPT

rcs1000 said:

I think the fracturing of the EU between those who want to join a superstate and those who do not was inevitable from the creation of the Euro. The mistake the EU made - to my mind - was in failing to realise this, and thinking it was merely about speeds of convergence. This led them to fail to put in place proper structures for those outside the Eurozone.

Going back to Gardenwalker's post, I think the idea of a Eurozone/non-Eurozone split is another one of those delusions. Probably it will endure until Hungary and Poland join.

Polls in both Poland and Hungary show big majorities against joining the Euro and the populist right wing governments in both countries are in no rush to join either

In Poland, yes. But I think there has been a fairly consistent 55-60% in favour of Euro membership in Hungary for some time.

Of course, as Hungary is more of a tourist destination than Poland that probably makes sense.

Barnesian

There are three ways that Mrs May will be out this year.

1. She decides she's had enough. She and Philip would prefer to go walking together in the hills than suffer the continual stress. I see no sign of this. Probability < 5%

2. There is a Conservative MP vote of no confidence in her leadership (probability < 33%) and she loses it (probability < 20%) so total probability <7%

3. There is a Labour led vote of no confidence in her Government (probability 50%) and she loses it (probability < 10% in spite of Brexit concessions) so total probability < 5%.

At 32% chance, it is a lay.

TheScreamingEagles

Barnesian said:

There are three ways that Mrs May will be out this year.

1. She decides she's had enough. She and Philip would prefer to go walking together in the hills than suffer the continual stress. I see no sign of this. Probability < 5%

2. There is a Conservative MP vote of no confidence in her leadership (probability < 33%) and she loses it (probability < 20%) so total probability <7%

3. There is a Labour led vote of no confidence in her Government (probability 50%) and she loses it (probability < 10% in spite of Brexit concessions) so total probability < 5%.

At 32% chance, it is a lay.</p>

I think you need to factor into 2) That Mrs May 'wins' the vote of confidence but is fatally damaged in the process, a bit like Thatcher winning the support of the majority of MPs in 1990 but standing down days later

HYUFD

TheScreamingEagles said:

Barnesian said:

There are three ways that Mrs May will be out this year.

1. She decides she's had enough. She and Philip would prefer to go walking together in the hills than suffer the continual stress. I see no sign of this. Probability < 5%

2. There is a Conservative MP vote of no confidence in her leadership (probability < 33%) and she loses it (probability < 20%) so total probability <7%

3. There is a Labour led vote of no confidence in her Government (probability 50%) and she loses it (probability < 10% in spite of Brexit concessions) so total probability < 5%.

At 32% chance, it is a lay.</p>

I think you need to factor into 2) That Mrs May 'wins' the vote of confidence but is fatally damaged in the process, a bit like Thatcher winning the support of the majority of MPs in 1990 but standing down days later

Thatcher's Tories trailed Kinnock's Labour by about 15% in most polls in late 1990, May's Tories are at least level with Corbyn's Labour in most current polls if not ahead

Cookie

rcs1000 said:

HYUFD said:

williamglenn said:

FPT

rcs1000 said:

I think the fracturing of the EU between those who want to join a superstate and those who do not was inevitable from the creation of the Euro. The mistake the EU made - to my mind - was in failing to realise this, and thinking it was merely about speeds of convergence. This led them to fail to put in place proper structures for those outside the Eurozone.

Going back to Gardenwalker's post, I think the idea of a Eurozone/non-Eurozone split is another one of those delusions. Probably it will endure until Hungary and Poland join.

Polls in both Poland and Hungary show big majorities against joining the Euro and the populist right wing governments in both countries are in no rush to join either

In Poland, yes. But I think there has been a fairly consistent 55-60% in favour of Euro membership in Hungary for some time.

Of course, as Hungary is more of a tourist destination than Poland that probably makes sense.

Iwent to Hungary with a group of friends a few years back. On the last day we were there, we realised that out of ten of us, nine of us had had a dodgy non-Hungarian note of much less value slipped into our change at some point. I'd have thought there would be a few in the tourist industry quite keen to keep the Forint to keep that particular scam going.

williamglenn

TheScreamingEagles said:

Barnesian said:

There are three ways that Mrs May will be out this year.

1. She decides she's had enough. She and Philip would prefer to go walking together in the hills than suffer the continual stress. I see no sign of this. Probability < 5%

2. There is a Conservative MP vote of no confidence in her leadership (probability < 33%) and she loses it (probability < 20%) so total probability <7%

3. There is a Labour led vote of no confidence in her Government (probability 50%) and she loses it (probability < 10% in spite of Brexit concessions) so total probability < 5%.

At 32% chance, it is a lay.</p>

I think you need to factor into 2) That Mrs May 'wins' the vote of confidence but is fatally damaged in the process, a bit like Thatcher winning the support of the majority of MPs in 1990 but standing down days later

After the last year I don't think May 'does' fatally damaged. She'd solider on for as long as the outcome of Brexit remains in doubt.

williamglenn

Tory campaign group calls for a people's vote on the deal.

https://citizens4britain.org/its-too-late-theresa/

If Mrs May wants to try and unite the Party then the best way would be to let our MPs have a free vote or alternatively to let the people decide whether we should accept the deal with the EU or stay in. A free vote or a people’s vote could be the one chance May has to save her government, her job and our party.

Barnesian

TheScreamingEagles said:

Barnesian said:

There are three ways that Mrs May will be out this year.

1. She decides she's had enough. She and Philip would prefer to go walking together in the hills than suffer the continual stress. I see no sign of this. Probability < 5%

2. There is a Conservative MP vote of no confidence in her leadership (probability < 33%) and she loses it (probability < 20%) so total probability <7%

3. There is a Labour led vote of no confidence in her Government (probability 50%) and she loses it (probability < 10% in spite of Brexit concessions) so total probability < 5%.

At 32% chance, it is a lay.</p>

I think you need to factor into 2) That Mrs May 'wins' the vote of confidence but is fatally damaged in the process, a bit like Thatcher winning the support of the majority of MPs in 1990 but standing down days later

Mrs T "won" the first round but she didn't actually win. It was a different system then. She was advised, one by one, by her Cabinet ministers that she wouldn't win the second round so she resigned rather than face that ignominy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservative_Party_(UK)_leadership_election,_1990

Mrs May just has to win one round by a simple majority. If she does, and she will by a large majority, she will carry on, strengthened sufficiently to sort out her cabinet. Her opponents know this, so they will not have the courage to actually trigger the vote. It's not like Mrs T at all.

Casino_Royale

AlastairMeeks said:

Newspapers made a huge mistake when they cleared out all the journalists and retained all the expensive op-ed writers. Reasonably good writers are plentiful. In order to provide a point of difference, newspapers need to supply something which the public can't get relatively easily elsewhere. In the case of newspapers, that something is news. That needs the fact-finders - the journalists.

That’s a very good point.

You get a couple in the Sunday Times. I always read Tim Shipman and Christina Lamb, for example.

Barnesian

Cookie said:

rcs1000 said:

HYUFD said:

williamglenn said:

FPT

rcs1000 said:

I think the fracturing of the EU between those who want to join a superstate and those who do not was inevitable from the creation of the Euro. The mistake the EU made - to my mind - was in failing to realise this, and thinking it was merely about speeds of convergence. This led them to fail to put in place proper structures for those outside the Eurozone.

Going back to Gardenwalker's post, I think the idea of a Eurozone/non-Eurozone split is another one of those delusions. Probably it will endure until Hungary and Poland join.

Polls in both Poland and Hungary show big majorities against joining the Euro and the populist right wing governments in both countries are in no rush to join either

In Poland, yes. But I think there has been a fairly consistent 55-60% in favour of Euro membership in Hungary for some time.

Of course, as Hungary is more of a tourist destination than Poland that probably makes sense.

Iwent to Hungary with a group of friends a few years back. On the last day we were there, we realised that out of ten of us, nine of us had had a dodgy non-Hungarian note of much less value slipped into our change at some point. I'd have thought there would be a few in the tourist industry quite keen to keep the Forint to keep that particular scam going.

We had a mixed experience as a tourist in Budapest. Lots to see. Loved the castle in Buda and the hot baths in the Gellert. Sipping Tokaji with locals in a Tokaji bar. Went to an opera in the State Opera House for less than £1 and were invited to sit in the VIP area. The taxi back to the nearby hotel had racked up about £20 on the meter before I insisted we got out and walked the rest of the way. A cruise on the Danube was about $40 but the same trip on the local ferry was about 40p. We went to a lovely hotel in Visagard with great views. We were the only ones in the restaurant. I chose an expensive Hungarian red. The bottle was open and filled with the slops from various bottles. Very mixed.

Wulfrun_Phil

williamglenn said:

Tory campaign group calls for a people's vote on the deal.

https://citizens4britain.org/its-too-late-theresa/

If Mrs May wants to try and unite the Party then the best way would be to let our MPs have a free vote or alternatively to let the people decide whether we should accept the deal with the EU or stay in. A free vote or a people’s vote could be the one chance May has to save her government, her job and our party.

"....let the people decide whether we should accept the deal with the EU or stay in..."

Utter nonsense. It would encourage the EU to offer the worst possible terms imaginable in order to make it more than likely that the UK would capitulate and stay in.

ydoethur

williamglenn said:

Tory campaign group calls for a people's vote on the deal.

https://citizens4britain.org/its-too-late-theresa/

If Mrs May wants to try and unite the Party then the best way would be to let our MPs have a free vote or alternatively to let the people decide whether we should accept the deal with the EU or stay in. A free vote or a people’s vote could be the one chance May has to save her government, her job and our party.

It is an avowedly non-Tory centre right pro-European campaign group.

To describe it as otherwise is simply dishonest.

Incidentally I continue to be bewildered at the sheer number of Remainers who appear to actually want us to crash out with no deal but that's a separate issue.

ydoethur

Barnesian said:

Cookie said:

rcs1000 said:

HYUFD said:

williamglenn said:

FPT

rcs1000 said:

I think the fracturing of the EU between those who want to join a superstate and those who do not was inevitable from the creation of the Euro. The mistake the EU made - to my mind - was in failing to realise this, and thinking it was merely about speeds of convergence. This led them to fail to put in place proper structures for those outside the Eurozone.

Going back to Gardenwalker's post, I think the idea of a Eurozone/non-Eurozone split is another one of those delusions. Probably it will endure until Hungary and Poland join.

Polls in both Poland and Hungary show big majorities against joining the Euro and the populist right wing governments in both countries are in no rush to join either

In Poland, yes. But I think there has been a fairly consistent 55-60% in favour of Euro membership in Hungary for some time.

Of course, as Hungary is more of a tourist destination than Poland that probably makes sense.

Iwent to Hungary with a group of friends a few years back. On the last day we were there, we realised that out of ten of us, nine of us had had a dodgy non-Hungarian note of much less value slipped into our change at some point. I'd have thought there would be a few in the tourist industry quite keen to keep the Forint to keep that particular scam going.

We had a mixed experience as a tourist in Budapest. Lots to see. Loved the castle in Buda and the hot baths in the Gellert. Sipping Tokaji with locals in a Tokaji bar. Went to an opera in the State Opera House for less than £1 and were invited to sit in the VIP area. The taxi back to the nearby hotel had racked up about £20 on the meter before I insisted we got out and walked the rest of the way. A cruise on the Danube was about $40 but the same trip on the local ferry was about 40p. We went to a lovely hotel in Visagard with great views. We were the only ones in the restaurant. I chose an expensive Hungarian red. The bottle was open and filled with the slops from various bottles. Very mixed.

The slops were very mixed? Or was it a wider point?

AlastairMeeks

Should anyone be travelling to Budapest for leisure, send me a message on vanilla mail. I’ll happily give my own recommendations, tailored to budgets appropriately.

ydoethur

Barnesian said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Barnesian said:

There are three ways that Mrs May will be out this year.

1. She decides she's had enough. She and Philip would prefer to go walking together in the hills than suffer the continual stress. I see no sign of this. Probability < 5%

2. There is a Conservative MP vote of no confidence in her leadership (probability < 33%) and she loses it (probability < 20%) so total probability <7%

3. There is a Labour led vote of no confidence in her Government (probability 50%) and she loses it (probability < 10% in spite of Brexit concessions) so total probability < 5%.

At 32% chance, it is a lay.</p>

I think you need to factor into 2) That Mrs May 'wins' the vote of confidence but is fatally damaged in the process, a bit like Thatcher winning the support of the majority of MPs in 1990 but standing down days later

Mrs T "won" the first round but she didn't actually win. It was a different system then. She was advised, one by one, by her Cabinet ministers that she wouldn't win the second round so she resigned rather than face that ignominy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservative_Party_(UK)_leadership_election,_1990

Mrs May just has to win one round by a simple majority. If she does, and she will by a large majority, she will carry on, strengthened sufficiently to sort out her cabinet. Her opponents know this, so they will not have the courage to actually trigger the vote. It's not like Mrs T at all.

Also - am I right in thinking there can't be another vote for a year after one is held and the motion lost?

So if a vote were held and she even won by one vote, her position would ironically be strengthened by it very considerably (as surely we all realise she's not going to last much beyond the end of next year).

Ishmael_Z

ydoethur said:

williamglenn said:

Tory campaign group calls for a people's vote on the deal.

https://citizens4britain.org/its-too-late-theresa/

If Mrs May wants to try and unite the Party then the best way would be to let our MPs have a free vote or alternatively to let the people decide whether we should accept the deal with the EU or stay in. A free vote or a people’s vote could be the one chance May has to save her government, her job and our party.

It is an avowedly non-Tory centre right pro-European campaign group.

To describe it as otherwise is simply dishonest.

I continue to be bewildered at the sheer number of Remainers who appear to actually want us to crash out with no deal.

I would hesitate to call its members nonentities, but none of them is a shoo-in as an entity. https://citizens4britain.org/who_we_are/

They don't want a "Take the deal or crash out" vote, they want a take the deal or stay in vote. "Stay in" requires retraction of the Art. 50 notice, which I think would actually be a runner given that 1. the EU would probably acquiesce in the withdrawal and 2. if it didn't the ECJ is at least as likely as not to hold that the notice is withdrawable.

Sean_F

williamglenn said:

Tory campaign group calls for a people's vote on the deal.

https://citizens4britain.org/its-too-late-theresa/

If Mrs May wants to try and unite the Party then the best way would be to let our MPs have a free vote or alternatively to let the people decide whether we should accept the deal with the EU or stay in. A free vote or a people’s vote could be the one chance May has to save her government, her job and our party.

It's not a Tory campaign group.

Sean_F

ydoethur said:

Barnesian said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Barnesian said:

There are three ways that Mrs May will be out this year.

1. She decides she's had enough. She and Philip would prefer to go walking together in the hills than suffer the continual stress. I see no sign of this. Probability < 5%

2. There is a Conservative MP vote of no confidence in her leadership (probability < 33%) and she loses it (probability < 20%) so total probability <7%

3. There is a Labour led vote of no confidence in her Government (probability 50%) and she loses it (probability < 10% in spite of Brexit concessions) so total probability < 5%.

At 32% chance, it is a lay.</p>

I think you need to factor into 2) That Mrs May 'wins' the vote of confidence but is fatally damaged in the process, a bit like Thatcher winning the support of the majority of MPs in 1990 but standing down days later

Mrs T "won" the first round but she didn't actually win. It was a different system then. She was advised, one by one, by her Cabinet ministers that she wouldn't win the second round so she resigned rather than face that ignominy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservative_Party_(UK)_leadership_election,_1990

Mrs May just has to win one round by a simple majority. If she does, and she will by a large majority, she will carry on, strengthened sufficiently to sort out her cabinet. Her opponents know this, so they will not have the courage to actually trigger the vote. It's not like Mrs T at all.

Also - am I right in thinking there can't be another vote for a year after one is held and the motion lost?

So if a vote were held and she even won by one vote, her position would ironically be strengthened by it very considerably (as surely we all realise she's not going to last much beyond the end of next year).

Even if she won, by say, 187 to 130, her position would be secure for a year.

ydoethur

Not sure if this has been posted but it's well worth a read:

https://www.spectator.co.uk/2018/05/italy-turns-on-the-european-union/

There are however a couple of points to note:

1) Italy is not the first country in Europe to 'fall' to populism. Even if we exclude Russia in 1991, Greece beat them to it under Tsipras.

2) It is a very interesting thought that the article fails to make explicit that populists on left and right are working together barring a difference of personality - confirming what I have said many times on here that populists whatever their ostensible label of left or right are two cheeks of the same arse. Essentially the 'it wasn't your fault, it wasn't all the immigrants/fat cats' arse.

Ishmael_Z

Off topic, for all the FOBT fans out there, Inspired Entertainment Inc (NASDAQ: INSE, US parent of the company which makes and runs the terminals) is down 15% today on news of the £2 limit.

Pulpstar

AlastairMeeks said:

Should anyone be travelling to Budapest for leisure, send me a message on vanilla mail. I’ll happily give my own recommendations, tailored to budgets appropriately.

My parents said they enjoyed the spas whilst there

David_Evershed

If May signs up to staying in the Customs Union she will find her leadership challenged.

Whoever takes over is then likely to attempt to have a general election, including on the customs union issue.

ydoethur

Ishmael_Z said:

ydoethur said:

williamglenn said:

Tory campaign group calls for a people's vote on the deal.

https://citizens4britain.org/its-too-late-theresa/

If Mrs May wants to try and unite the Party then the best way would be to let our MPs have a free vote or alternatively to let the people decide whether we should accept the deal with the EU or stay in. A free vote or a people’s vote could be the one chance May has to save her government, her job and our party.

It is an avowedly non-Tory centre right pro-European campaign group.

To describe it as otherwise is simply dishonest.

I continue to be bewildered at the sheer number of Remainers who appear to actually want us to crash out with no deal.

I would hesitate to call its members nonentities, but none of them is a shoo-in as an entity. https://citizens4britain.org/who_we_are/

They don't want a "Take the deal or crash out" vote, they want a take the deal or stay in vote. "Stay in" requires retraction of the Art. 50 notice, which I think would actually be a runner given that 1. the EU would probably acquiesce in the withdrawal and 2. if it didn't the ECJ is at least as likely as not to hold that the notice is withdrawable.

The thing is Article 50 almost certainly can be revoked. I just doubt very much if it can be done unilaterally. There's no loophole in the wording to permit it (I think the person who wrote it is an absolute tenth rate moron, and yes I know he's British).

If it can't be done unilaterally then it requires us to ask and the other 27 to agree. That's not impossible. Indeed, I imagine the EU would be furious with any member that tried to block it, as think what a fillip a failed attempt to leave would be to full-fledged federalism. But equally it isn't something that can be taken casually for granted given the way things have fallen over the last two years.

I also must confess I do wonder what problems it would cause. One of the gripes about the EU has always been its, shall we say politely, patrician view of plebiscites. Ignoring a rejection of membership however would be a big, big deal. It would mark the moment the EU would be unable to pretend any more that its members were sovereign nation states working together, and instead were caught (in at least one case, against popular will) in a superstate in size and wealth equal to any power in the world. Moreover, a superstate currently run by people who even on the rare occasions they are sober would look out of their intellectual and moral depth running a village post office.

Many things would have to change dramatically and I wonder if they have all been considered in the context of this idea of revoking A50

Gardenwalker

Sean_F said:

williamglenn said:

Tory campaign group calls for a people's vote on the deal.

https://citizens4britain.org/its-too-late-theresa/

If Mrs May wants to try and unite the Party then the best way would be to let our MPs have a free vote or alternatively to let the people decide whether we should accept the deal with the EU or stay in. A free vote or a people’s vote could be the one chance May has to save her government, her job and our party.

It's not a Tory campaign group.

But it is run by Tories, or at least ex-Tories.

It sounds like a damned sensible idea to me.
Soon we will know the proposed final destination of Brexit, and how we will get there. A lot of the gloss has worn off the Brexit manifesto.

By the same token, we know that Project Fear looks to have been overcooked.

We could actually have a debate on the facts, not the illusions. Should we choose to continue with Brexit - which I think on balance we would - it would be much less controversial.

I agree with others though that to avoid moral hazard, the referendum should be announced only once negotiations have concluded.

Sean_F

ydoethur said:

Ishmael_Z said:

ydoethur said:

williamglenn said:

Tory campaign group calls for a people's vote on the deal.

https://citizens4britain.org/its-too-late-theresa/

If Mrs May wants to try and unite the Party then the best way would be to let our MPs have a free vote or alternatively to let the people decide whether we should accept the deal with the EU or stay in. A free vote or a people’s vote could be the one chance May has to save her government, her job and our party.

It is an avowedly non-Tory centre right pro-European campaign group.

To describe it as otherwise is simply dishonest.

I continue to be bewildered at the sheer number of Remainers who appear to actually want us to crash out with no deal.

I would hesitate to call its members nonentities, but none of them is a shoo-in as an entity. https://citizens4britain.org/who_we_are/

They don't want a "Take the deal or crash out" vote, they want a take the deal or stay in vote. "Stay in" requires retraction of the Art. 50 notice, which I think would actually be a runner given that 1. the EU would probably acquiesce in the withdrawal and 2. if it didn't the ECJ is at least as likely as not to hold that the notice is withdrawable.

The thing is Article 50 almost certainly can be revoked. I just doubt very much if it can be done unilaterally. There's no loophole in the wording to permit it (I think the person who wrote it is an absolute tenth rate moron, and yes I know he's British).

If it can't be done unilaterally then it requires us to ask and the other 27 to agree. That's not impossible. Indeed, I imagine the EU would be furious with any member that tried to block it, as think what a fillip a failed attempt to leave would be to full-fledged federalism. But equally it isn't something that can be taken casually for granted given the way things have fallen over the last two years.

I also must confess I do wonder what problems it would cause. One of the gripes about the EU has always been its, shall we say politely, patrician view of plebiscites. Ignoring a rejection of membership however would be a big, big deal. It would mark the moment the EU would be unable to pretend any more that its members were sovereign nation states working together, and instead were caught (in at least one case, against popular will) in a superstate in size and wealth equal to any power in the world. Moreover, a superstate currently run by people who even on the rare occasions they are sober would look out of their intellectual and moral depth running a village post office.

Many things would have to change dramatically and I wonder if they have all been considered in the context of this idea of revoking A50

If A.50 could be revoked unilaterally, it would say so.

Gardenwalker

Sean_F said:

ydoethur said:

Ishmael_Z said:

ydoethur said:

williamglenn said:

Tory campaign group calls for a people's vote on the deal.

https://citizens4britain.org/its-too-late-theresa/

If Mrs May wantsher job and our party.

It is an avowedly non-Tory centre right pro-European campaign group.

To describe it as otherwise is simply dishonest.

I continue to be bewildered at the sheer number of Remainers who appear to actually want us to crash out with no deal.

I would hesitate to call its members nonentities, but none of them is a shoo-in as an entity. https://citizens4britain.org/who_we_are/

They don't want a "Take the deal or crash out" vote, they want a take the deal or stay in vote. "Stay in" requires retraction of the Art. 50 notice, which I think would actually be a runner given that 1. the EU would probably acquiesce in the withdrawal and 2. if it didn't the ECJ is at least as likely as not to hold that the notice is withdrawable.

The thing is Article 50 almost certainly can be revoked. I just doubt very much if it can be done unilaterally. There's no loophole in the wording to permit it (I think the person who wrote it is an absolute tenth rate moron, and yes I know he's British).

If it can't be done unilaterally then it requires us to ask and the other 27 to agree. That's not impossible. Indeed, I imagine the EU would be furious with any member that tried to block it, as think what a fillip a failed attempt to leave would be to full-fledged federalism. But equally it isn't something that can be taken casually for granted given the way things have fallen over the last two years.

I also must confess I do wonder what problems it would cause. One of the gripes about the EU has always been its, shall we say politely, patrician view of plebiscites. Ignoring a rejection of membership however would be a big, big deal. It would mark the moment the EU would be unable to pretend any more that its members were sovereign nation states working together, and instead were caught (in at least one case, against popular will) in a superstate in size and wealth equal to any power in the world. Moreover, a superstate currently run by people who even on the rare occasions they are sober would look out of their intellectual and moral depth running a village post office.

Many things would have to change dramatically and I wonder if they have all been considered in the context of this idea of revoking A50

If A.50 could be revoked unilaterally, it would say so.

A50 was designed never to be used.
There is A50, and there is realpolitik.

Barnesian

ydoethur said:

Barnesian said:

Cookie said:

rcs1000 said:

HYUFD said:

williamglenn said:

FPT

rcs1000 said:

I think the fracturing of the EU between those who want to join a superstate and those who do not was inevitable from the creation of the Euro. The mistake the EU made - to my mind - was in failing to realise this, and thinking it was merely about speeds of convergence. This led them to fail to put in place proper structures for those outside the Eurozone.

Going back to Gardenwalker's post, I think the idea of a Eurozone/non-Eurozone split is another one of those delusions. Probably it will endure until Hungary and Poland join.

Polls in both Poland and Hungary show big majorities against joining the Euro and the populist right wing governments in both countries are in no rush to join either

In Poland, yes. But I think there has been a fairly consistent 55-60% in favour of Euro membership in Hungary for some time.

Of course, as Hungary is more of a tourist destination than Poland that probably makes sense.

Iwent to Hungary with a group of friends a few years back. On the last day we were there, we realised that out of ten of us, nine of us had had a dodgy non-Hungarian note of much less value slipped into our change at some point. I'd have thought there would be a few in the tourist industry quite keen to keep the Forint to keep that particular scam going.

We had a mixed experience as a tourist in Budapest. Lots to see. Loved the castle in Buda and the hot baths in the Gellert. Sipping Tokaji with locals in a Tokaji bar. Went to an opera in the State Opera House for less than £1 and were invited to sit in the VIP area. The taxi back to the nearby hotel had racked up about £20 on the meter before I insisted we got out and walked the rest of the way. A cruise on the Danube was about $40 but the same trip on the local ferry was about 40p. We went to a lovely hotel in Visagard with great views. We were the only ones in the restaurant. I chose an expensive Hungarian red. The bottle was open and filled with the slops from various bottles. Very mixed.

The slops were very mixed? Or was it a wider point?

A wider point It's a great city(s) but beware as a tourist. This was about 25 years ago so it may have changed.

Barnesian

ydoethur said:

Barnesian said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Barnesian said:

There are three ways that Mrs May will be out this year.

1. She decides she's had enough. She and Philip would prefer to go walking together in the hills than suffer the continual stress. I see no sign of this. Probability < 5%

2. There is a Conservative MP vote of no confidence in her leadership (probability < 33%) and she loses it (probability < 20%) so total probability <7%

3. There is a Labour led vote of no confidence in her Government (probability 50%) and she loses it (probability < 10% in spite of Brexit concessions) so total probability < 5%.

At 32% chance, it is a lay.</p>

I think you need to factor into 2) That Mrs May 'wins' the vote of confidence but is fatally damaged in the process, a bit like Thatcher winning the support of the majority of MPs in 1990 but standing down days later

Mrs T "won" the first round but she didn't actually win. It was a different system then. She was advised, one by one, by her Cabinet ministers that she wouldn't win the second round so she resigned rather than face that ignominy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservative_Party_(UK)_leadership_election,_1990

Mrs May just has to win one round by a simple majority. If she does, and she will by a large majority, she will carry on, strengthened sufficiently to sort out her cabinet. Her opponents know this, so they will not have the courage to actually trigger the vote. It's not like Mrs T at all.

Also - am I right in thinking there can't be another vote for a year after one is held and the motion lost?

So if a vote were held and she even won by one vote, her position would ironically be strengthened by it very considerably (as surely we all realise she's not going to last much beyond the end of next year).

That's right. That's why they don't have the courage to trigger a vote. She should say "Bring it on".

Gardenwalker

Barnesian said:

ydoethur said:

Barnesian said:

Cookie said:

rcs1000 said:

HYUFD said:

williamglenn said:

FPT

rcs1000 said:

I think the fracturing of the EU between those who want to join a superstate and those who do not was inevitable from the creation of the Euro. The mistake the EU made - to my mind - was in failing to realise this, and thinking it was merely about speeds of convergence. This led them to fail to put in place proper structures for those outside the Eurozone.

Going back to Gardenwalker's post, I think the idea of a Eurozone/non-Eurozone split is another one of those delusions. Probably it will endure until Hungary and Poland join.

Polls in both Poland and Hungary show big majorities against joining the Euro and the populist right wing governments in both countries are in no rush to join either

In Poland, yes. But I think there has been a fairly consistent 55-60% in favour of Euro membership in Hungary for some time.

Of course, as Hungary is more of a tourist destination than Poland that probably makes sense.

Iwent to Hungary with a group of friends a few years back. On the last day we were there, we realised that out of ten of us, nine of us had had a dodgy non-Hungarian note of much less value slipped into our change at some point. I'd have thought there would be a few in the tourist industry quite keen to keep the Forint to keep that particular scam going.

We had a mixed experience as a tourist in Budapest. Lots to see. Loved the castle in Buda and the hot baths in the Gellert. Sipping Tokaji with locals in a Tokaji bar. Went to an opera in the State Opera House for less than £1 and were invited to sit in the VIP area. The taxi back to the nearby hotel had racked up about £20 on the meter before I insisted we got out and walked the rest of the way. A cruise on the Danube was about $40 but the same trip on the local ferry was about 40p. We went to a lovely hotel in Visagard with great views. We were the only ones in the restaurant. I chose an expensive Hungarian red. The bottle was open and filled with the slops from various bottles. Very mixed.

The slops were very mixed? Or was it a wider point?

A wider point It's a great city(s) but beware as a tourist. This was about 25 years ago so it may have changed.

I had a client in Budapest 2015/16. Central Budapest felt like any modern European capital - safe, clean, buzzing. I could have been on the Rhine rather than the Danube.

ydoethur

Gardenwalker said:

I agree with others though that to avoid moral hazard, the referendum should be announced only once negotiations have concluded.

Would the timings work? Let's say negotiations conclude in September (I don't think they can unless there's no deal but that's another question) can we then have bills before both houses to put it to a vote, have a campaign, have a vote and have further bills to ratify the result prior to the ratification deadline which will be in March at the latest?

kle4

ydoethur said:

Gardenwalker said:

I agree with others though that to avoid moral hazard, the referendum should be announced only once negotiations have concluded.

Would the timings work? Let's say negotiations conclude in September (I don't think they can unless there's no deal but that's another question) can we then have bills before both houses to put it to a vote, have a campaign, have a vote and have further bills to ratify the result prior to the ratification deadline which will be in March at the latest?

Where there is unity they could do it all very quickly I have no doubt. But unity would surely be lacking.

Ishmael_Z

ydoethur said:

The thing is Article 50 almost certainly can be revoked. I just doubt very much if it can be done unilaterally. There's no loophole in the wording to permit it (I think the person who wrote it is an absolute tenth rate moron, and yes I know he's British).

If it can't be done unilaterally then it requires us to ask and the other 27 to agree. That's not impossible. Indeed, I imagine the EU would be furious with any member that tried to block it, as think what a fillip a failed attempt to leave would be to full-fledged federalism. But equally it isn't something that can be taken casually for granted given the way things have fallen over the last two years.

I also must confess I do wonder what problems it would cause. One of the gripes about the EU has always been its, shall we say politely, patrician view of plebiscites. Ignoring a rejection of membership however would be a big, big deal. It would mark the moment the EU would be unable to pretend any more that its members were sovereign nation states working together, and instead were caught (in at least one case, against popular will) in a superstate in size and wealth equal to any power in the world. Moreover, a superstate currently run by people who even on the rare occasions they are sober would look out of their intellectual and moral depth running a village post office.

Many things would have to change dramatically and I wonder if they have all been considered in the context of this idea of revoking A50

It would be bonkers if the notice could not be revoked even with the consent of the 28 states, and if they all agreed to regard it as revoked who would challenge the agreement? I suppose Ukip might have a go. I think the odds of its being revocable unilaterally are 50/50: you point out that it doesn't say it is revocable, but I reply that it doesn't say that it isn't.

Barnesian

Pulpstar said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Should anyone be travelling to Budapest for leisure, send me a message on vanilla mail. I’ll happily give my own recommendations, tailored to budgets appropriately.

My parents said they enjoyed the spas whilst there

The Gellert is fantastic. http://gellertspa.com/

Barnesian

David_Evershed said:

If May signs up to staying in the Customs Union she will find her leadership challenged.

Whoever takes over is then likely to attempt to have a general election, including on the customs union issue.

No-one will takeover.

ydoethur

Ishmael_Z said:

ydoethur said:

The thing is Article 50 almost certainly can be revoked. I just doubt very much if it can be done unilaterally. There's no loophole in the wording to permit it (I think the person who wrote it is an absolute tenth rate moron, and yes I know he's British).

If it can't be done unilaterally then it requires us to ask and the other 27 to agree. That's not impossible. Indeed, I imagine the EU would be furious with any member that tried to block it, as think what a fillip a failed attempt to leave would be to full-fledged federalism. But equally it isn't something that can be taken casually for granted given the way things have fallen over the last two years.

I also must confess I do wonder what problems it would cause. One of the gripes about the EU has always been its, shall we say politely, patrician view of plebiscites. Ignoring a rejection of membership however would be a big, big deal. It would mark the moment the EU would be unable to pretend any more that its members were sovereign nation states working together, and instead were caught (in at least one case, against popular will) in a superstate in size and wealth equal to any power in the world. Moreover, a superstate currently run by people who even on the rare occasions they are sober would look out of their intellectual and moral depth running a village post office.

Many things would have to change dramatically and I wonder if they have all been considered in the context of this idea of revoking A50

It would be bonkers if the notice could not be revoked even with the consent of the 28 states, and if they all agreed to regard it as revoked who would challenge the agreement? I suppose Ukip might have a go. I think the odds of its being revocable unilaterally are 50/50: you point out that it doesn't say it is revocable, but I reply that it doesn't say that it isn't.

True, but the wording strongly implies it is, because it refers to 'notice.'

Of course, a way could be found, if we wanted to stay, even if somebody decided to be awkward. The most obvious solution that occurs is that the transition end date could be left off the withdrawal agreement. Problem solved at the stroke of a pen. But that then raises big issues of governance and democracy the EU is simply completely unfitted to face.

Of course, if we are to be in a federal superstate a crisis that swept away the Commission, the Presidency and the Council and replaced them with proper democratic functions would be very beneficial. But would a man like Selmayr go quietly if the ground was cut from underneath him?

williamglenn

kle4 said:

ydoethur said:

Gardenwalker said:

I agree with others though that to avoid moral hazard, the referendum should be announced only once negotiations have concluded.

Would the timings work? Let's say negotiations conclude in September (I don't think they can unless there's no deal but that's another question) can we then have bills before both houses to put it to a vote, have a campaign, have a vote and have further bills to ratify the result prior to the ratification deadline which will be in March at the latest?

Where there is unity they could do it all very quickly I have no doubt. But unity would surely be lacking.

Everyone thought it would be tough to pull off an early election, but the political scales tipped the moment the podium was set up outside Downing Street. In practice, once May makes the call, it will be politically very difficult for anyone to argue that people don't deserve a say.

DavidL

AlastairMeeks said:

Newspapers made a huge mistake when they cleared out all the journalists and retained all the expensive op-ed writers. Reasonably good writers are plentiful. In order to provide a point of difference, newspapers need to supply something which the public can't get relatively easily elsewhere. In the case of newspapers, that something is news. That needs the fact-finders - the journalists.

Not sure I agree with that. The last national paper I bought regularly was the Indy. Eventually it got too much ("one too many tarred seabirds on the front page" as my wife put it) but what kept it going for longer than it might otherwise is that they had a series of good opinion writers who were stimulating to read. I never really looked for news in the paper (other than something like Robert Fisk who gave context and oversight into what he was writing). I could get the news anywhere. What I actually wanted was an opinion, analysis and the collation of relevant information.

williamglenn

ydoethur said:

williamglenn said:

Tory campaign group calls for a people's vote on the deal.

https://citizens4britain.org/its-too-late-theresa/

If Mrs May wants to try and unite the Party then the best way would be to let our MPs have a free vote or alternatively to let the people decide whether we should accept the deal with the EU or stay in. A free vote or a people’s vote could be the one chance May has to save her government, her job and our party.

It is an avowedly non-Tory centre right pro-European campaign group.

To describe it as otherwise is simply dishonest.

Their Twitter handle is ToriesVsBrexit...

MaxPB

williamglenn said:

ydoethur said:

williamglenn said:

Tory campaign group calls for a people's vote on the deal.

https://citizens4britain.org/its-too-late-theresa/

If Mrs May wants to try and unite the Party then the best way would be to let our MPs have a free vote or alternatively to let the people decide whether we should accept the deal with the EU or stay in. A free vote or a people’s vote could be the one chance May has to save her government, her job and our party.

It is an avowedly non-Tory centre right pro-European campaign group.

To describe it as otherwise is simply dishonest.

Their Twitter handle is ToriesVsBrexit...

And?

Gardenwalker

williamglenn said:

kle4 said:

ydoethur said:

Gardenwalker said:

I agree with others though that to avoid moral hazard, the referendum should be announced only once negotiations have concluded.

Would the timings work? Let's say negotiations conclude in September (I don't think they can unless there's no deal but that's another question) can we then have bills before both houses to put it to a vote, have a campaign, have a vote and have further bills to ratify the result prior to the ratification deadline which will be in March at the latest?

Where there is unity they could do it all very quickly I have no doubt. But unity would surely be lacking.

Everyone thought it would be tough to pull off an early election, but the political scales tipped the moment the podium was set up outside Downing Street. In practice, once May makes the call, it will be politically very difficult for anyone to argue that people don't deserve a say.

The timing is not the challenge.

It offers May the chance to go down in history as the Great Repairer. I’d expect her to sit out any campaign, as Wilson did in the 70s.

AndyJS

Defeat for Tory MP Philip Davies according to this article:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/lower-betting-cap-is-a-victory-for-morality-over-money-h9h5sf7m3

williamglenn

MaxPB said:

williamglenn said:

ydoethur said:

williamglenn said:

Tory campaign group calls for a people's vote on the deal.

https://citizens4britain.org/its-too-late-theresa/

If Mrs May wants to try and unite the Party then the best way would be to let our MPs have a free vote or alternatively to let the people decide whether we should accept the deal with the EU or stay in. A free vote or a people’s vote could be the one chance May has to save her government, her job and our party.

It is an avowedly non-Tory centre right pro-European campaign group.

To describe it as otherwise is simply dishonest.

Their Twitter handle is ToriesVsBrexit...

And?

And I don't think it's dishonest to call them Tories.

ydoethur

williamglenn said:

ydoethur said:

williamglenn said:

Tory campaign group calls for a people's vote on the deal.

https://citizens4britain.org/its-too-late-theresa/

If Mrs May wants to try and unite the Party then the best way would be to let our MPs have a free vote or alternatively to let the people decide whether we should accept the deal with the EU or stay in. A free vote or a people’s vote could be the one chance May has to save her government, her job and our party.

It is an avowedly non-Tory centre right pro-European campaign group.

To describe it as otherwise is simply dishonest.

Their Twitter handle is ToriesVsBrexit...

By that logic, Margot James is still an MP.

Are you saying you only looked at their twitter account and not at their website? Because if so it's intriguing you cited the latter.

williamglenn

Gardenwalker said:

williamglenn said:

kle4 said:

ydoethur said:

Gardenwalker said:

I agree with others though that to avoid moral hazard, the referendum should be announced only once negotiations have concluded.

Would the timings work? Let's say negotiations conclude in September (I don't think they can unless there's no deal but that's another question) can we then have bills before both houses to put it to a vote, have a campaign, have a vote and have further bills to ratify the result prior to the ratification deadline which will be in March at the latest?

Where there is unity they could do it all very quickly I have no doubt. But unity would surely be lacking.

Everyone thought it would be tough to pull off an early election, but the political scales tipped the moment the podium was set up outside Downing Street. In practice, once May makes the call, it will be politically very difficult for anyone to argue that people don't deserve a say.

The timing is not the challenge.

It offers May the chance to go down in history as the Great Repairer. I’d expect her to sit out any campaign, as Wilson did in the 70s.

Exactly. She can say that she's delivered on what the people voted for in 2016 and negotiated a 'safe' Brexit, proven 'project fear' to be wrong (get in some digs against Osborne) and shown that the sky will not fall in if we leave. On the other hand we don't *have* to make that choice. The people started this process and it is now up to the people to have the final say.

May can legitimately rise above it all and leave it up to others to campaign, having taken Brexiteers on a journey that makes it almost impossible for them to back the deal with anything other than grim determination.

NickPalmer

David_Evershed said:

If May signs up to staying in the Customs Union she will find her leadership challenged.

Whoever takes over is then likely to attempt to have a general election, including on the customs union issue.

It won't be that clear-cut - anything European is made of fudge, including departure. The deal will be something like "an agreed intention to move toward maximum facilitation as soon as the technology is available, with temporary arrangements to retain a customs union in the interim."

Rather like War Loan, which will be repaid as soon as circumstances allow.

Gardenwalker

williamglenn said:

Gardenwalker said:

williamglenn said:

kle4 said:

ydoethur said:

Gardenwalker said:

I agree with others though that to avoid moral hazard, the referendum should be announced only once negotiations have concluded.

Would the timings work? Let's say negotiations conclude in September (I don't think they can unless there's no deal but that's another question) can we then have bills before both houses to put it to a vote, have a campaign, have a vote and have further bills to ratify the result prior to the ratification deadline which will be in March at the latest?

Where there is unity they could do it all very quickly I have no doubt. But unity would surely be lacking.

Everyone thought it would be tough to pull off an early election, but the political scales tipped the moment the podium was set up outside Downing Street. In practice, once May makes the call, it will be politically very difficult for anyone to argue that people don't deserve a say.

The timing is not the challenge.

It offers May the chance to go down in history as the Great Repairer. I’d expect her to sit out any campaign, as Wilson did in the 70s.

Exactly. She can say that she's delivered on what the people voted for in 2016 and negotiated a 'safe' Brexit, proven 'project fear' to be wrong (get in some digs against Osborne) and shown that the sky will not fall in if we leave. On the other hand we don't *have* to make that choice. The people started this process and it is now up to the people to have the final say.

May can legitimately rise above it all and leave it up to others to campaign, having taken Brexiteers on a journey that makes it almost impossible for them to back the deal with anything other than grim determination.

It would have the added benefit of dividing the Labour caucus and membership from their leader. I can’t imagine Johnson coming out of it that well, either.

williamglenn

ydoethur said:

williamglenn said:

ydoethur said:

williamglenn said:

Tory campaign group calls for a people's vote on the deal.

https://citizens4britain.org/its-too-late-theresa/

If Mrs May wants to try and unite the Party then the best way would be to let our MPs have a free vote or alternatively to let the people decide whether we should accept the deal with the EU or stay in. A free vote or a people’s vote could be the one chance May has to save her government, her job and our party.

It is an avowedly non-Tory centre right pro-European campaign group.

To describe it as otherwise is simply dishonest.

Their Twitter handle is ToriesVsBrexit...

By that logic, Margot James is still an MP.

Are you saying you only looked at their twitter account and not at their website? Because if so it's intriguing you cited the latter.

No, by that logic Margot James is still Margot James. I don't know why you're so touchy about describing a group containing many Tories, which self-describes as Tory on Twitter as 'Tory'.

williamglenn

Gardenwalker said:

williamglenn said:

Gardenwalker said:

williamglenn said:

kle4 said:

ydoethur said:

Gardenwalker said:

I agree with others though that to avoid moral hazard, the referendum should be announced only once negotiations have concluded.

Would the timings work? Let's say negotiations conclude in September (I don't think they can unless there's no deal but that's another question) can we then have bills before both houses to put it to a vote, have a campaign, have a vote and have further bills to ratify the result prior to the ratification deadline which will be in March at the latest?

Where there is unity they could do it all very quickly I have no doubt. But unity would surely be lacking.

Everyone thought it would be tough to pull off an early election, but the political scales tipped the moment the podium was set up outside Downing Street. In practice, once May makes the call, it will be politically very difficult for anyone to argue that people don't deserve a say.

The timing is not the challenge.

It offers May the chance to go down in history as the Great Repairer. I’d expect her to sit out any campaign, as Wilson did in the 70s.

Exactly. She can say that she's delivered on what the people voted for in 2016 and negotiated a 'safe' Brexit, proven 'project fear' to be wrong (get in some digs against Osborne) and shown that the sky will not fall in if we leave. On the other hand we don't *have* to make that choice. The people started this process and it is now up to the people to have the final say.

May can legitimately rise above it all and leave it up to others to campaign, having taken Brexiteers on a journey that makes it almost impossible for them to back the deal with anything other than grim determination.

It would have the added benefit of dividing the Labour caucus and membership from their leader. I can’t imagine Johnson coming out of it that well, either.

It seems like such an obvious move from a competent PM that I'm amazed more people don't expect it to happen.

ydoethur

williamglenn said:

ydoethur said:

williamglenn said:

ydoethur said:

williamglenn said:

Tory campaign group calls for a people's vote on the deal.

https://citizens4britain.org/its-too-late-theresa/

If Mrs May wants to try and unite the Party then the best way would be to let our MPs have a free vote or alternatively to let the people decide whether we should accept the deal with the EU or stay in. A free vote or a people’s vote could be the one chance May has to save her government, her job and our party.

It is an avowedly non-Tory centre right pro-European campaign group.

To describe it as otherwise is simply dishonest.

Their Twitter handle is ToriesVsBrexit...

By that logic, Margot James is still an MP.

Are you saying you only looked at their twitter account and not at their website? Because if so it's intriguing you cited the latter.

No, by that logic Margot James is still Margot James. I don't know why you're so touchy about describing a group containing many Tories, which self-describes as Tory on Twitter as 'Tory'.

Because they don't. You are once again pushing an agenda and twisting facts to suit yourself. A brief check of their website would have revealed they identify as ex Tories. You presented it as a 'Tory campaign group.' That implied it was associated with the party and therefore told a deliberate untruth - which you do far too often.

I don't mind that you want us to stay in. I'd prefer it if we weren't leaving although I've resigned myself to it (and things are panning out much as I expected in the event of a leave vote).

I do mind that you don't seem to be able to deal with reality and are exceptionally unpleasant to people who point it out to you.

williamglenn

ydoethur said:

williamglenn said:

ydoethur said:

williamglenn said:

ydoethur said:

williamglenn said:

Tory campaign group calls for a people's vote on the deal.

https://citizens4britain.org/its-too-late-theresa/

If Mrs May wants to try and unite the Party then the best way would be to let our MPs have a free vote or alternatively to let the people decide whether we should accept the deal with the EU or stay in. A free vote or a people’s vote could be the one chance May has to save her government, her job and our party.

It is an avowedly non-Tory centre right pro-European campaign group.

To describe it as otherwise is simply dishonest.

Their Twitter handle is ToriesVsBrexit...

By that logic, Margot James is still an MP.

Are you saying you only looked at their twitter account and not at their website? Because if so it's intriguing you cited the latter.

No, by that logic Margot James is still Margot James. I don't know why you're so touchy about describing a group containing many Tories, which self-describes as Tory on Twitter as 'Tory'.

Because they don't. You are once again pushing an agenda and twisting facts to suit yourself. A brief check of their website would have revealed they identify as ex Tories. You presented it as a 'Tory campaign group.' That implied it was associated with the party and therefore told a deliberate untruth - which you do far too often.

I don't mind that you want us to stay in. I'd prefer it if we weren't leaving although I've resigned myself to it (and things are panning out much as I expected in the event of a leave vote).

I do mind that you don't seem to be able to deal with reality and are exceptionally unpleasant to people who point it out to you.

I suppose calling Conservative Home a Tory website is also out of order?

The text I quoted refers to "our party" so if you want to accuse anyone of misrepresentation, talk to the author.

williamglenn

https://citizens4britain.org/tories-against-brexit-join-our-campaign/

With the start of 2018 we have launched our new campaign, Tories Against Brexit, via social media. This is because 2018 is the year in which the big decisions will be taken and with them comes our last chance to stop the disaster of Brexit. Now is the time for all who recognise that Brexit threatens our prosperity, our Union and our place in the world to come together to oppose it.

We set up Citizens 4 Britain last year because we wanted to create a place where anyone who had voted Tory, or who belonged (or had recently belonged) to the Conservative Party, could link to other like-minded, anti-Brexit Tories.

welshowl

williamglenn said:

Gardenwalker said:

williamglenn said:

Gardenwalker said:

williamglenn said:

kle4 said:

ydoethur said:

Gardenwalker said:

I agree with others though that to avoid moral hazard, the referendum should be announced only once negotiations have concluded.

Would the timings work? Let's say negotiations conclude in September (I don't think they can unless there's no deal but that's another question) can we then have bills before both houses to put it to a vote, have a campaign, have a vote and have further bills to ratify the result prior to the ratification deadline which will be in March at the latest?

Where there is unity they could do it all very quickly I have no doubt. But unity would surely be lacking.

Everyone thought it would be tough to pull off an early election, but the political scales tipped the moment the podium was set up outside Downing Street. In practice, once May makes the call, it will be politically very difficult for anyone to argue that people don't deserve a say.

The timing is not the challenge.

It offers May the chance to go down in history as the Great Repairer. I’d expect her to sit out any campaign, as Wilson did in the 70s.

Exactly. She can say that she's delivered on what the people voted for in 2016 and negotiated a 'safe' Brexit, proven 'project fear' to be wrong (get in some digs against Osborne) and shown that the sky will not fall in if we leave. On the other hand we don't *have* to make that choice. The people started this process and it is now up to the people to have the final say.

May can legitimately rise above it all and leave it up to others to campaign, having taken Brexiteers on a journey that makes it almost impossible for them to back the deal with anything other than grim determination.

It would have the added benefit of dividing the Labour caucus and membership from their leader. I can’t imagine Johnson coming out of it that well, either.

It seems like such an obvious move from a competent PM that I'm amazed more people don't expect it to happen.

Because most of us are on planet earth.

TheScreamingEagles

ydoethur said:

williamglenn said:

ydoethur said:

williamglenn said:

Tory campaign group calls for a people's vote on the deal.

https://citizens4britain.org/its-too-late-theresa/

If Mrs May wants to try and unite the Party then the best way would be to let our MPs have a free vote or alternatively to let the people decide whether we should accept the deal with the EU or stay in. A free vote or a people’s vote could be the one chance May has to save her government, her job and our party.

It is an avowedly non-Tory centre right pro-European campaign group.

To describe it as otherwise is simply dishonest.

Their Twitter handle is ToriesVsBrexit...

By that logic, Margot James is still an MP.

Are you saying you only looked at their twitter account and not at their website? Because if so it's intriguing you cited the latter.

Margot James is still an MP.

DavidL

ydoethur said:

Ishmael_Z said:

ydoethur said:

williamglenn said:

I would hesitate to call its members nonentities, but none of them is a shoo-in as an entity. https://citizens4britain.org/who_we_are/

They don't want a "Take the deal or crash out" vote, they want a take the deal or stay in vote. "Stay in" requires retraction of the Art. 50 notice, which I think would actually be a runner given that 1. the EU would probably acquiesce in the withdrawal and 2. if it didn't the ECJ is at least as likely as not to hold that the notice is withdrawable.

The thing is Article 50 almost certainly can be revoked. I just doubt very much if it can be done unilaterally. There's no loophole in the wording to permit it (I think the person who wrote it is an absolute tenth rate moron, and yes I know he's British).

If it can't be done unilaterally then it requires us to ask and the other 27 to agree. That's not impossible. Indeed, I imagine the EU would be furious with any member that tried to block it, as think what a fillip a failed attempt to leave would be to full-fledged federalism. But equally it isn't something that can be taken casually for granted given the way things have fallen over the last two years.

I also must confess I do wonder what problems it would cause. One of the gripes about the EU has always been its, shall we say politely, patrician view of plebiscites. Ignoring a rejection of membership however would be a big, big deal. It would mark the moment the EU would be unable to pretend any more that its members were sovereign nation states working together, and instead were caught (in at least one case, against popular will) in a superstate in size and wealth equal to any power in the world. Moreover, a superstate currently run by people who even on the rare occasions they are sober would look out of their intellectual and moral depth running a village post office.

Many things would have to change dramatically and I wonder if they have all been considered in the context of this idea of revoking A50

I believe that the Court case in the Court of Session where the petitioners are seeking a referral to the CJEU on the question of whether it is possible to revoke Art 50 was this week. Unfortunately I have been far too busy to drop in!

welshowl

Anyway: there I was having a cheeky beer in the garden on a glorious warm evening and I looked up and about 250ft overhead was a Lancaster in full roar. What an assault on the senses. Apparently it’s been doing the rounds today (75th anniversary of the dams raid). Anyone else seen it out and about? ( There’s only two - I looked up - flying in the world and the other one’s in Canada).

Scott_P

welshowl said:

Anyway: there I was having a cheeky beer in the garden on a glorious warm evening and I looked up and about 250ft overhead was a Lancaster in full roar. What an assault on the senses. Apparently it’s been doing the rounds today (75th anniversary of the dams raid). Anyone else seen it out and about? ( There’s only two - I looked up - flying in the world and the other one’s in Canada).

https://www.iwm.org.uk/events/duxford-battle-of-britain-air-show-2018

If you like the sound of Merlin engines at full chat...

RobD

Bercow in trouble?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/05/17/john-bercow-accused-calling-andrea-leadsom-stupid-woman-foul/

williamglenn

RobD said:

Bercow in trouble?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/05/17/john-bercow-accused-calling-andrea-leadsom-stupid-woman-foul/

Didn’t Leadsom help bring down Michael Fallon?

surby

RobD said:

Bercow in trouble?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/05/17/john-bercow-accused-calling-andrea-leadsom-stupid-woman-foul/

Leak from Bercow camp to increase his popularity.

surby

He [Varadkar] said: “Any move on customs with the UK would be welcome but I need to be very clear that avoiding a hard border between Northern Ireland and Ireland is about more than customs. The single market and aspects related to regulation are important as well.”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/may/17/theresa-may-tries-to-rally-support-for-customs-plan-from-eu-leaders

Toms

RobD said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Newspapers made a huge mistake when they cleared out all the journalists and retained all the expensive op-ed writers. Reasonably good writers are plentiful. In order to provide a point of difference, newspapers need to supply something which the public can't get relatively easily elsewhere. In the case of newspapers, that something is news. That needs the fact-finders - the journalists.

Compare and contrast the Guardian with the Telegraph.

I used to regularly read the Guardian, but I find its new size hard to read. And any paper that feels its quick crossword should fill half a page is either demented or in trouble. I read the Telegraph because my partner gets it: its size is easy too manage, no doubt like broad aheets of old.
I think I agree with Mr. Meeks generally. And too often the media seem to feed on each other.
But some writers do stand out---for instance the article by Janan Ganesh in the FT's May 5th issue about our society's run away pustular swelling of CP Snow's two cultures.

GIN1138

RobD said:

Bercow in trouble?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/05/17/john-bercow-accused-calling-andrea-leadsom-stupid-woman-foul/

This has got to be the end of Bercow now surely?

TheScreamingEagles

https://twitter.com/PRHRoy/status/997114219341500416
https://twitter.com/spectator/status/997082156533977088

Barnesian

surby said:

He [Varadkar] said: “Any move on customs with the UK would be welcome but I need to be very clear that avoiding a hard border between Northern Ireland and Ireland is about more than customs. The single market and aspects related to regulation are important as well.”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/may/17/theresa-may-tries-to-rally-support-for-customs-plan-from-eu-leaders

That's what we have been saying on here. Single market here we come (dressed up in other words).

"Varadkar later told reporters that, during 45 minutes of talks, May had sketched out her hopes for what he described as a “deep customs arrangement”" That will please the Brexiteers.

I think May will continue to repeat "We are leaving the Customs Union and we are leaving the Single Market" as we stay in the Customs Union and stay in the Single Market. She'll keep saying it until she retires.

surby

Barnesian said:

surby said:

He [Varadkar] said: “Any move on customs with the UK would be welcome but I need to be very clear that avoiding a hard border between Northern Ireland and Ireland is about more than customs. The single market and aspects related to regulation are important as well.”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/may/17/theresa-may-tries-to-rally-support-for-customs-plan-from-eu-leaders

That's what we have been saying on here. Single market here we come (dressed up in other words).

"Varadkar later told reporters that, during 45 minutes of talks, May had sketched out her hopes for what he described as a “deep customs arrangement”" That will please the Brexiteers.

I think May will continue to repeat "We are leaving the Customs Union and we are leaving the Single Market" as we stay in the Customs Union and stay in the Single Market. She'll keep saying it until she retires.

Frictionless movement from "customs partnership" to "deep customs arrangement"

May was correct all along. We need an ambitious, bespoke arrangement.

Norway + Turkey