Nicky Morgan on Ridge states TM will not lead into the next GE
So both wings of the party want a new leader post Brexit. Betting on TM to go next year must be favourite
Not exactly a shock. Would mean certain defeat for the Tories. I am heavyweight on her going next year - was a bit worried it might happen this year but unlikely now.
I actually do feel sorry for her. She was handed a poisoned chalice and unfortunately just hasn't got the ability or the guile to take the country out of the present bind.
Nicky Morgan on Ridge states TM will not lead into the next GE
So both wings of the party want a new leader post Brexit. Betting on TM to go next year must be favourite
Not exactly a shock. Would mean certain defeat for the Tories.
I actually do feel sorry for her. She was handed a poisoned chalice and unfortunately just hasn't got the ability or the guile to take the country out of the present bind.
The EU are going from strength to strength. The UK is going down the toilet. If it wasn't for the inherent good manners of the french and the pragnatism of the Germans they'd say what most of the EU are now thinking. That they no longer want Britain to be part of the EU and 'very close' is probably too close. Reversing Brexit from their point of view isn't an option.
How refreshing. A bacon buttie and reading Roger's musings. The UK is NOT going down the toilet. I am a Remainer, but I think the EU will live to regret their current stance. Its the EU that has to compromise more that the UK. Currently I think the EU can get stuffed.
No, the UK is not going down the toilet, at worst we are in brown trousers territory.
The EU has no need to compromise, indeed no-one has any need to do so. The government has to come up with a plan that works though, and that takes more than 6 months, hence Blind Brexit to EEA plus CU plus VAT while we get our act together. Brexit ends not with a bang but with a whimper.
The problem is fundamental. Neither the country nor the government can agree what we should do.
I can see it taking as long to finally reconcile as the Civil War and it’s aftermath did.
No one is attempting a reconstruction. At present Leave seem intent on quite the reverse.
Leave seem intent on engineering their own defeat in a blaze of nihilism.
Listening to Sophie Ridge at the labour conference there is little support from those interviewed for a second referendum. Both Lisa Nandy and Rebecca Long Bailey really do not want one
Corbyn may try a fudge but he simply will not risk stopping Brexit which would restrain his policies
Surely as loyal mps (well they wont defect to anyone, which amounts to the same thing) of course they would back Corbyn in that they support a GE rather than referendum, I presume, but if the members want the latter they will go for that? I really see few downsides for Corbyn and co in that approach, unless they somehow get in power and are now committed to a referendum they don't want to offer. Which is not impossible, but to keep being all things to all people is probably worth the risk.
If Corbyn becomes PM and has to hold a second referendum, do you think he would have the honesty to campaign for Leave this time? That would be a delicious irony.....
I think he would try to sit it out. Or he would be bounced into remain by the big two polarizing.
Edit: Also it gives more justification for his no critics to justify not flouncing out if the party over brexit as some reports laughably claim some might - as the party under Corbyn would have offered an ref to those very remainy mps, but never got the chance.
Nicky Morgan on Ridge states TM will not lead into the next GE
So both wings of the party want a new leader post Brexit. Betting on TM to go next year must be favourite
Not exactly a shock. Would mean certain defeat for the Tories.
I actually do feel sorry for her. She was handed a poisoned chalice and unfortunately just hasn't got the ability or the guile to take the country out of the present bind.
And, good morning all!
Why certain defeat
And good morning
A GE before 2022 almost certainly sees the Tories lose imo as they will be divided. May leading is part of that division and she would probably lose since shed only lead then into a GE if we get bounced into one soon by utter chaos(though the header us right that doesn't make it simple) in which case I defy someone to explain how the Tories ok polling holds up during a government collapse.
Nicky Morgan on Ridge states TM will not lead into the next GE
So both wings of the party want a new leader post Brexit. Betting on TM to go next year must be favourite
Not exactly a shock. Would mean certain defeat for the Tories.
I actually do feel sorry for her. She was handed a poisoned chalice and unfortunately just hasn't got the ability or the guile to take the country out of the present bind.
And, good morning all!
Why certain defeat
And good morning
A GE before 2022 almost certainly sees the Tories lose imo as they will be divided. May leading is part of that division and she would probably lose since shed only lead then into a GE if we get bounced into one soon by utter chaos(though the header us right that doesn't make it simple) in which case I defy someone to explain how the Tories ok polling holds up during a government collapse.
'The choice before the country is brutal. It is between the world heralded by the Anglo-American rightwing thinktanks or European liberal social democracy.'
It's a common argument but I've never been sure I buy it entirely. Does leaving the EU mean our only option is the worldview espoused by rightwing thinktanks? It won't be very appetising for most voters - particularly the detail on environmental standards. Does anyone have an alternative vision of Brexit other than the 'maintain the benefits but not the obligations' fantasy?
You can argue it's just a clever piece of black and white thinking by Hutton but if Leavers can't actually spell out a vision I'll start to come round to the 2nd referendum/general election idea.
Nicky Morgan on Ridge states TM will not lead into the next GE
So both wings of the party want a new leader post Brexit. Betting on TM to go next year must be favourite
Not exactly a shock. Would mean certain defeat for the Tories.
I actually do feel sorry for her. She was handed a poisoned chalice and unfortunately just hasn't got the ability or the guile to take the country out of the present bind.
And, good morning all!
Why certain defeat
And good morning
A GE before 2022 almost certainly sees the Tories lose imo as they will be divided. May leading is part of that division and she would probably lose since shed only lead then into a GE if we get bounced into one soon by utter chaos(though the header us right that doesn't make it simple) in which case I defy someone to explain how the Tories ok polling holds up during a government collapse.
Not with Corbyn leading labour
Yes, even then. If he can match last time and the Tories do worse, he wins. If the gov collapses they will do worse I think.
Norway creates a custom border on the island of Ireland so is unacceptable to the EU
It needs to be Norway plus customs union plus common VAT area. Chequers had elements of these for this reason but was unworkable.
It can't however be Norway as Norway requires freedom of movement and if Brexit was about anything it was to remove freedom of movement unless skilled with a job to go to...
I suspect the EU would carve out some limited exclusions on FoM if we agree to the rest of the package.
I would say the EU's real red lines are 1. Any agreement must not have negative impacts for them. They have the relative power to insist on this. 2. The EU won't change the way it does anything to accommodate UK requirements. 3. Any settlement must be a downgrade / clearly worse for the UK, compared with membership. Negotiation would take place within those parameters. FoM seems like a second order priority for them.
Regardless, we would need to go for a Norway arrangement if we are to avoid chaos and take our chances on the FoM component.
Edit. The FoM negotiation won't take place for several years. It's reasonable that we won't at that stage be bound by interpretations of an old referendum that didn't include any reference to immigration.
I've been musing on a historical government comparison to the present shambolic political situation that prevails and I'm bereft.
The UK is treated to a government in name only stumbling from one self inflicted crisis to another and without the faintest clue as to the direction of travel or how to get the train back on the tracks. A Prime Minister who is driving her party into the buffers with many of her MP's happy to see the impending train wreck because the carriages were partly made in EU.
Meanwhile over 60 million passengers crowd onto "The Flying Brexit" heading out of Europe Station with a mixture of excitement, confusion, denial, anger, hope and bewilderment. Looking for a lead they note our former Foreign Secretary squeezing himself into the carriage toilet plotting to replace the driver whilst hoping he hasn't flushed his hopes down the lav when the train was stationary a few stops back.
Suddenly the Prime Minister decides to travel up and down the Irish border because she wont be railroaded about how the Ulster goods van operates. All steamed up Mrs May takes a branch line to Salzburg and takes on water, more dead weight baggage and heads out after Station Master Tusk declines her kind invitation to uncouple the third class compartment and leave it at Calais.
Someone pull the communication cord - All is not lost - Waiting to board the train is Her Majesty ... Loyal Opposition for the use of .... but wait their connection seems to have been derailed between Hamas Central and Auschwitz with the signal box flashing red .... very red.
Anyone for the tube ?!? .... No, I thought not .... I'm off to thumb a ride on the royal train. Thank you Ma'am, Balmoral would do very nicely for the coming year ....
Is your ARSE giving any emanations to the public? Or are you too busy stocking up on fine pies, ready to pull up your drawbridge against roaming packs of post Brexit peasant brigands?
Good morning young Foxy.
Like the finest boat trains of the past my ARSE has sailed its' last, its' day is done and it is now firmly planted on a mahogany toilet seat in the bowels of Auchentennach Castle.
Fine pies continue to see modest growth after a period where the main ingredient was notable for their disinclination to contribute to the coffers of the Scottish nobility. I also fear that a pie filled with the detritus of assorted Kippers and their kind would be unpalatable to 48% of the market.
Kipper pies would be unpalatable to much of the 52% who would Leave well alone, thank you very much.
You could try Left-overs pie, but they are likely to be a bit hard to swallow I fear, being well past their best.
Norway creates a custom border on the island of Ireland so is unacceptable to the EU
It needs to be Norway plus customs union plus common VAT area. Chequers had elements of these for this reason but was unworkable.
It can't however be Norway as Norway requires freedom of movement and if Brexit was about anything it was to remove freedom of movement unless skilled with a job to go to...
. 3. Any settlement must be a downgrade / clearly worse for the UK, compared with membership. .
That's anything, according to them. So they have the means to be flexible and still show the settlement is a clear downgrade for the UK.
Norway creates a custom border on the island of Ireland so is unacceptable to the EU
Indeed, but there seems to be an increasing number of Brexit supporters looking for a quick way out. (I think Hitchens was only ever a Brexit supporter in theory but didn't vote for it.)
Peter Hitchens is a professional contrarian, and as doctrinaire as his brother.
There's no possible course of action that any Government of any stripe could ever take that wouldn't displease him, and that he wouldn't oppose.
The EU are going from strength to strength. The UK is going down the toilet. If it wasn't for the inherent good manners of the french and the pragnatism of the Germans they'd say what most of the EU are now thinking. That they no longer want Britain to be part of the EU and 'very close' is probably too close. Reversing Brexit from their point of view isn't an option.
Whatever, all is not well in the EU.
The Dublin Convention was clearly constructed by the clinically insane (or the EU).
It is simply not conceivable that Italy & Spain & Greece & Malta can survive with the rest of the EU simply saying (as Idiot Macron does) "these countries must live up to their responsibilities".
The Dublin Convention (as it stands) puts an insuperable burden on a few countries, and is just manifestly unfair. It will lead to governments in all these countries that make the present Italian Government look sweet & docile.
Ultimately, the migration that will likely continue for the foreseeable future from Africa & the Middle East has to be a shared responsibility of the whole of the EU, not just a few states that by accident of geography are the ones in which migrants land.
If the EU are not thinking too much about Brexit, it is because they have still more insuperable problems to solve.
Nicky Morgan on Ridge states TM will not lead into the next GE
So both wings of the party want a new leader post Brexit. Betting on TM to go next year must be favourite
Not exactly a shock. Would mean certain defeat for the Tories.
I actually do feel sorry for her. She was handed a poisoned chalice and unfortunately just hasn't got the ability or the guile to take the country out of the present bind.
And, good morning all!
Why certain defeat
And good morning
A GE before 2022 almost certainly sees the Tories lose imo as they will be divided. May leading is part of that division and she would probably lose since shed only lead then into a GE if we get bounced into one soon by utter chaos(though the header us right that doesn't make it simple) in which case I defy someone to explain how the Tories ok polling holds up during a government collapse.
Not with Corbyn leading labour
Though not his greatest fan, it would be wise not to underestimate him again. Corbyn is a proven campaigner.
Nicky Morgan on Ridge states TM will not lead into the next GE
So both wings of the party want a new leader post Brexit. Betting on TM to go next year must be favourite
Not exactly a shock. Would mean certain defeat for the Tories.
I actually do feel sorry for her. She was handed a poisoned chalice and unfortunately just hasn't got the ability or the guile to take the country out of the present bind.
And, good morning all!
Why certain defeat
And good morning
A GE before 2022 almost certainly sees the Tories lose imo as they will be divided. May leading is part of that division and she would probably lose since shed only lead then into a GE if we get bounced into one soon by utter chaos(though the header us right that doesn't make it simple) in which case I defy someone to explain how the Tories ok polling holds up during a government collapse.
Not with Corbyn leading labour
Though not his greatest fan, it would be wise not to underestimate him again. Corbyn is a proven campaigner.
And all he really needs to do is stand still, should the government collapse.
I was flicking through last nights thread where seanT was musing on the diversity of Leavers he knows....A billionaire he's aquainted with ....A French aristo.... The Chinese consort of Ho Chi Minh's billiardboard cleaner.. The principal fluffer at Topkapi Palace.....His 24 year old niece....
It occured to me that I don't knowingly know a single Leaver. Out of a large and (I thought) diverse mix of friends aquaintances work colleagues clients neigbours family hired hands etc I can't think of a single one who has said they are in favour of Brexit.......
Interesting thought from the Electoral Reform Soc. 'Were legislation introduced the day parliament returned from recess, on 9 October, the earliest Thursday on which a referendum could be held would be 28 March - the very day before exit day.’
Not entirely sure that’s true as if Parliament were largely supportive the necessary legislation could be quicker, but it does provide a cautionary note of practicality.
Nicky Morgan on Ridge states TM will not lead into the next GE
So both wings of the party want a new leader post Brexit. Betting on TM to go next year must be favourite
Not exactly a shock. Would mean certain defeat for the Tories.
I actually do feel sorry for her. She was handed a poisoned chalice and unfortunately just hasn't got the ability or the guile to take the country out of the present bind.
And, good morning all!
Why certain defeat
And good morning
A GE before 2022 almost certainly sees the Tories lose imo as they will be divided. May leading is part of that division and she would probably lose since shed only lead then into a GE if we get bounced into one soon by utter chaos(though the header us right that doesn't make it simple) in which case I defy someone to explain how the Tories ok polling holds up during a government collapse.
Not with Corbyn leading labour
Though not his greatest fan, it would be wise not to underestimate him again. Corbyn is a proven campaigner.
True.
Burnham, Cooper, Kendall, Smith, & May all made the mistake of underestimating his campaigning ability.
It is possible (though one can never be entirely sure with politicians) that "lessons have been learnt".
Nicky Morgan on Ridge states TM will not lead into the next GE
So both wings of the party want a new leader post Brexit. Betting on TM to go next year must be favourite
Not exactly a shock. Would mean certain defeat for the Tories.
I actually do feel sorry for her. She was handed a poisoned chalice and unfortunately just hasn't got the ability or the guile to take the country out of the present bind.
And, good morning all!
Why certain defeat
And good morning
A GE before 2022 almost certainly sees the Tories lose imo as they will be divided. May leading is part of that division and she would probably lose since shed only lead then into a GE if we get bounced into one soon by utter chaos(though the header us right that doesn't make it simple) in which case I defy someone to explain how the Tories ok polling holds up during a government collapse.
Not with Corbyn leading labour
Though not his greatest fan, it would be wise not to underestimate him again. Corbyn is a proven campaigner.
Just lucky he is up against duffers similar to himself.
I was flicking through last nights thread where seanT was musing on the diversity of Leavers he knows....A billionaire he's aquainted with ....A French aristo.... The Chinese consort of Ho Chi Minh's billiardboard cleaner.. The principal fluffer at Topkapi Palace.....His 24 year old niece....
It occured to me that I don't knowingly know a single Leaver. Out of a large and (I thought) diverse mix of friends aquaintances work colleagues clients neigbours family hired hands etc I can't think of a single one who has said they are in favour of Brexit.......
Brexiters don't want to engage with nutters, so we generally keep quiet....
Norway creates a custom border on the island of Ireland so is unacceptable to the EU
It needs to be Norway plus customs union plus common VAT area. Chequers had elements of these for this reason but was unworkable.
It can't however be Norway as Norway requires freedom of movement and if Brexit was about anything it was to remove freedom of movement unless skilled with a job to go to...
. 3. Any settlement must be a downgrade / clearly worse for the UK, compared with membership. .
That's anything, according to them. So they have the means to be flexible and still show the settlement is a clear downgrade for the UK.
The EU aren't flexible. I would say more a can't than won't. It doesn't matter, though for us. We have to deal with it. Better than nothing but worse than the status quo is a big negotiating space. The mistake many people in the UK make is in thinking the base case is the status quo. The base case is nothing. I expect we will end up in a situation that is a lot better than nothing and a lot worse than what we had before. The EU's third objective isn't difficult to achieve.
Anyway, on topic, it's clear that agreeing a special status for NI that the DUP/May can tolerate, as well as the EU/Eire, is key and will unlock the whole deal, as I've said for some time. The UK isn't going to die in a ditch over geographic labelling and physiosanitary rules, and services aren't the issue - despite how much Barnier is trying it on.
That will mean a compromise on all sides, so all can take something away from it, and must include for respecting the UK's constitutional integrity in a politically obvious way whilst also giving NI special status within the EU. I'd therefore expect soft-ish checks on some agricultural goods/products by exception both between Eire/NI *and* between NI/GB. I'd expect that to be wrapped up in some overarching political statement that gives succour to all sides all round.
The rest will come down to deal sweetening (i.e. money), a bit of can-kicking and some political punch & judy.
Listening to Sophie Ridge at the labour conference there is little support from those interviewed for a second referendum. Both Lisa Nandy and Rebecca Long Bailey really do not want one
Corbyn may try a fudge but he simply will not risk stopping Brexit which would restrain his policies
I think the fudge would be that he'd aim to negotiate to allow his priorities. If the EU was told we wanted a customs union (which solves the Northern Ireland issue because we'd all be in it), weren't too bothered about immigration but would like some sort of constraints, aimed for a constructive partnership, but really wanted agreement that we could nationalise water and rail, I think they'd be fine with it. Keeping British railways private is really nowhere on the EU priority list.
Interesting thought from the Electoral Reform Soc. 'Were legislation introduced the day parliament returned from recess, on 9 October, the earliest Thursday on which a referendum could be held would be 28 March - the very day before exit day.’
Not entirely sure that’s true as if Parliament were largely supportive the necessary legislation could be quicker, but it does provide a cautionary note of practicality.
I seem to recall a thread by Mr Herdson of this parish, sometime around April, when even then the timetable for a second referendum was mighty tight.
Remainers have unwisely spent their time chasing a rainbow.
"Saddle up the unicorns, we've a People's Vote to chase down...."
If Labour do move to a position of a public vote on Theresa May's Brexit deal.
I think it should be in 2 parts Q1 1) I Accept 2) I Reject
Q2 Only applicable if I reject wins 1) Leave with no deal 2)Abandon BREXIT
2) 1) for me
Of course the preferable option is that there is no 2nd Referendum
I think you are asking a lot of the electorate.
Why do we have a Parliament/politicians? Basically so that someone else can do ‘that sort of thinking’ for us.
Since Brexit is essentially a hoax, perpetuated by fraudsters, the only argument *for* Brexit is that we voted for it once. It can only be undone by a counter vote.
Anyway, on topic, it's clear that agreeing a special status for NI that the DUP/May can tolerate, as well as the EU/Eire, is key and will unlock the whole deal, as I've said for some time. The UK isn't going to die in a ditch over geographic labelling and physiosanitary rules, and services aren't the issue - despite how much Barnier is trying it on.
That will mean a compromise on all sides, so all can take something away from it, and must include for respecting the UK's constitutional integrity in a politically obvious way whilst also giving NI special status within the EU. I'd therefore expect soft-ish checks on some agricultural goods/products by exception both between Eire/NI *and* between NI/GB. I'd expect that to be wrapped up in some overarching political statement that gives succour to all sides all round.
The rest will come down to deal sweetening (i.e. money), a bit of can-kicking and some political punch & judy.
While I’d very much like to think you are right, I can’t see Arlene and her mob agreeing to anything which affects the sanctity of the Union.
Although I suppose enough money to fix the fuel (or whatever it was) scam might.
Norway creates a custom border on the island of Ireland so is unacceptable to the EU
It needs to be Norway plus customs union plus common VAT area. Chequers had elements of these for this reason but was unworkable.
It can't however be Norway as Norway requires freedom of movement and if Brexit was about anything it was to remove freedom of movement unless skilled with a job to go to...
. 3. Any settlement must be a downgrade / clearly worse for the UK, compared with membership. .
That's anything, according to them. So they have the means to be flexible and still show the settlement is a clear downgrade for the UK.
The EU aren't flexible. I would say more a can't than won't. It doesn't matter, though for us. We have to deal with it. Better than nothing but worse than the status quo is a big negotiating space. The mistake many people in the UK make is in thinking the base case is the status quo. The base case is nothing. I expect we will end up in a situation that is a lot better than nothing and a lot worse than what we had before. The EU's third objective isn't difficult to achieve.
I know that aren't flexible, my point was they could be without sacrificing the need to make sure it looks bad for us, because they don't need to worry about something we think is ok being seen as anything other than bad by those they need to see it as bad.
I was flicking through last nights thread where seanT was musing on the diversity of Leavers he knows....A billionaire he's aquainted with ....A French aristo.... The Chinese consort of Ho Chi Minh's billiardboard cleaner.. The principal fluffer at Topkapi Palace.....His 24 year old niece....
It occured to me that I don't knowingly know a single Leaver. Out of a large and (I thought) diverse mix of friends aquaintances work colleagues clients neigbours family hired hands etc I can't think of a single one who has said they are in favour of Brexit.......
I'm not sure how to interpret this....
In my circle of friends and family, there is more of a mix though Remain still dominate - probably 80/20 in my circle.
I was flicking through last nights thread where seanT was musing on the diversity of Leavers he knows....A billionaire he's aquainted with ....A French aristo.... The Chinese consort of Ho Chi Minh's billiardboard cleaner.. The principal fluffer at Topkapi Palace.....His 24 year old niece....
It occured to me that I don't knowingly know a single Leaver. Out of a large and (I thought) diverse mix of friends aquaintances work colleagues clients neigbours family hired hands etc I can't think of a single one who has said they are in favour of Brexit.......
I'm not sure how to interpret this....
“Knowingly”. That’s the word. What about the ones that keep quiet?
Many of us have learnt to keep stumm at social events out of a desire for a nice relatively quiet evening for fear of provoking some sanctimonious rant dripping in virtue signalling goo.
Mr. Roger, I remember reading a tweet from someone a day or so after the result came in. He was in shock, couldn't believe it, nobody he knew had voted Leave. One reply said that some people he'd known probably did, but likely didn't want to say so.
'The choice before the country is brutal. It is between the world heralded by the Anglo-American rightwing thinktanks or European liberal social democracy.'
It's a common argument but I've never been sure I buy it entirely. Does leaving the EU mean our only option is the worldview espoused by rightwing thinktanks? It won't be very appetising for most voters - particularly the detail on environmental standards. Does anyone have an alternative vision of Brexit other than the 'maintain the benefits but not the obligations' fantasy?
You can argue it's just a clever piece of black and white thinking by Hutton but if Leavers can't actually spell out a vision I'll start to come round to the 2nd referendum/general election idea.
Do they really believe the European parliament is going to be dominated by social democrats after the next set of European elections in 2019? Crazy.
There’s a pretty good chance that the EU Parliament looks very, very different to how it does now, following the 2019 elections. Plenty of people across Europe are willing to vote for more extreme parties in order to give their own Establishments a kicking.
'The choice before the country is brutal. It is between the world heralded by the Anglo-American rightwing thinktanks or European liberal social democracy.'
It's a common argument but I've never been sure I buy it entirely. Does leaving the EU mean our only option is the worldview espoused by rightwing thinktanks? It won't be very appetising for most voters - particularly the detail on environmental standards. Does anyone have an alternative vision of Brexit other than the 'maintain the benefits but not the obligations' fantasy?
You can argue it's just a clever piece of black and white thinking by Hutton but if Leavers can't actually spell out a vision I'll start to come round to the 2nd referendum/general election idea.
Do they really believe the European parliament is going to be dominated by social democrats after the next set of European elections in 2019? Crazy.
There’s a pretty good chance that the EU Parliament looks very, very different to how it does now, following the 2019 elections. Plenty of people across Europe are willing to vote for more extreme parties in order to give their own Establishments a kicking.
Thatcher was removed by the “men in grey suits”. She won the ballot in the leadership election but not by enough to keep the confidence of her senior colleagues (which is all the MIGS are).
The Leavers in government (setting aside Johnson who is a self-interested fool) proposed a Canada style FTA. It was Olly Robbins and former Remaibs who messed it up.
A Canada style FTA would have been easier and quicker than most FTAs (because of pre-existing alignment) but that’s not the same as saying it would be quick or easy.
The UK is now in the last chance saloon and there is no time left to negotiate a bespoke future arrangement with the EU. In order to avoid a disastrous "no deal" Brexit, the only choice is to accept one of the following 2 options: a) a Norway-style association agreement, remaining in the Single Market but not the Customs Union; or: b) a much looser relationship based on Canada's trade deal with the EU. However, in both these cases, the 6 counties would need to stay in the Customs Union.
The Chequers plan is clearly dead (if it was ever alive) because it fragments the Single Market, and the sooner the Maybot acknowledges this the better. Tusk provided an apt illustration by his excellent Instagram joke about cherry picking. Mrs T would have decisively chosen the Norway option - after all, she was the main promoter of the Single Market, but did not believe in Delors-style "ever closer union".
If this incompetent government doesn't face facts soon, bring on a GE - Corbyn would make a better PM, at least from a foreign policy perspective. Not only would Labour deal better with the EU, but there would be a re-orientation of the UK's relationships with criminal racist regimes elsewhere that foment violence, such as Myanmar and Saudi Arabia.
You state as fact that the 6 counties would need to stay in the customs union
Thatcher was removed by the “men in grey suits”. She won the ballot in the leadership election but not by enough to keep the confidence of her senior colleagues (which is all the MIGS are).
The Leavers in government (setting aside Johnson who is a self-interested fool) proposed a Canada style FTA. It was Olly Robbins and former Remaibs who messed it up.
A Canada style FTA would have been easier and quicker than most FTAs (because of pre-existing alignment) but that’s not the same as saying it would be quick or easy.
Most FTAs don't have to deliver a solution for Northern Ireland...
@FF43 I suspect the EU would carve out some limited exclusions on FoM if we agree to the rest of the package.
I would say the EU's real red lines are 1. Any agreement must not have negative impacts for them. They have the relative power to insist on this. 2. The EU won't change the way it does anything to accommodate UK requirements. 3. Any settlement must be a downgrade / clearly worse for the UK, compared with membership. Negotiation would take place within those parameters. FoM seems like a second order priority for them.
----
1. All exit agreements will have a negative impact on them. The UK opening the door to free trade from elsewhere is a competitive drawback.
2. Agreed.
3. That is in the eye of the beholder though; what they perceive to be a downgrade could well be viewed as an upgrade in the UK. What they consider to be 'benefits' we may consider to be detriments.
1. The EU will lock those down. Any variation on standard Canada or Norway will require the UK to be bound by terms that prevent competitive advantage while having privileged access to the EU market. This assumes No Deal is not viable.
3. The EU doesn't care about opinion in third countries, as Britain will become. It does care about opinion in EU member states. Leaving has to look like a downgrade. That hasn't been a problem so far. Most people in the UK think Brexit will be worse. They are split between those that think it a bad idea and those that blame the EU/May/Remoaners, ie definitely not themselves for having chosen to Leave.
Interesting thought from the Electoral Reform Soc. 'Were legislation introduced the day parliament returned from recess, on 9 October, the earliest Thursday on which a referendum could be held would be 28 March - the very day before exit day.’
Not entirely sure that’s true as if Parliament were largely supportive the necessary legislation could be quicker, but it does provide a cautionary note of practicality.
I seem to recall a thread by Mr Herdson of this parish, sometime around April, when even then the timetable for a second referendum was mighty tight.
Remainers have unwisely spent their time chasing a rainbow.
"Saddle up the unicorns, we've a People's Vote to chase down...."
Never ask a question to which you do not know the answer! Didn’t take me long to question the desirability of a second referendum; simply annul the first one due to widespread fraud and chicanery. Although the howling about ‘respecting the People’s Vote” would be loud and long.
I don’t see an end to this coming in my lifetime; I’m 80. Although I’m reasonably fit and, more or less, compos mentis.
'The choice before the country is brutal. It is between the world heralded by the Anglo-American rightwing thinktanks or European liberal social democracy.'
It's a common argument but I've never been sure I buy it entirely. Does leaving the EU mean our only option is the worldview espoused by rightwing thinktanks? It won't be very appetising for most voters - particularly the detail on environmental standards. Does anyone have an alternative vision of Brexit other than the 'maintain the benefits but not the obligations' fantasy?
You can argue it's just a clever piece of black and white thinking by Hutton but if Leavers can't actually spell out a vision I'll start to come round to the 2nd referendum/general election idea.
Do they really believe the European parliament is going to be dominated by social democrats after the next set of European elections in 2019? Crazy.
There’s a pretty good chance that the EU Parliament looks very, very different to how it does now, following the 2019 elections. Plenty of people across Europe are willing to vote for more extreme parties in order to give their own Establishments a kicking.
We just got ours in a cycle early, when UKIP won.
Always one step ahead of the EU is the UK!
I think to be honest our low point was in 2009, when we sent Nick Griffin and Andrew Brons to Brussels after the BNP got 6% of the vote.
Thatcher was removed by the “men in grey suits”. She won the ballot in the leadership election but not by enough to keep the confidence of her senior colleagues (which is all the MIGS are).
The Leavers in government (setting aside Johnson who is a self-interested fool) proposed a Canada style FTA. It was Olly Robbins and former Remaibs who messed it up.
A Canada style FTA would have been easier and quicker than most FTAs (because of pre-existing alignment) but that’s not the same as saying it would be quick or easy.
Margaret Thatcher did not win the ballot in the leadership election. There was to be a further round and she withdrew when it became apparent she would lose.
Corbyn suggests he would prefer a general election to a second referendum and thinks he can get enough Tory MPs to vote for one so he becomes PM by Christmas, trying to use a customs union to resolve the Irish border issue.
However interestingly he also suggests if the Labour conference votes for a second EU referendum he would be bound by that. If there is No Deal and Labour, LD, SNP MPs and Tory rebels like Soubry and Grieve vote for one it would therefore be more likely than not
Corbyn on Marr just putting forward the same Brexit as TM but he would negotiate better.
He hasn't a clue and prevaricates on second referendum
And some think he will be our next PM
Unfortunately, he has managed to become the candidate people pin their beliefs and hopes on no matter what he says.
So there will still be a load of people who think he is pro-Brexit and equally those who think he is anti-Brexit regardless of what crap comes out of his mouth.
Corbyn on Marr just putting forward the same Brexit as TM but he would negotiate better.
He hasn't a clue and prevaricates on second referendum
And some think he will be our next PM
You are spinning like a top based on what I saw and heard.
Corbyns business managers, seeing that there will be 2ndRef conference vote and will lose it, now change position so it’s not talked up as a defeat. Could it really be a defeat for them anyway, if it’s not high on their priority list, not particularly crucial to either Corbyns leadership survival or his Premiership when in Downing Street? More importantly they probably feel they must sideline Watson’s noises on this week so he can’t take any credit.
However. For anyone who would dearly love Brexit to happen, or dearly love Theresa May to survive, this moment when it inevitably comes just adds a bit more of fear factor. This is a policy about 99% of the Labour PLP could come together on, a strong voting block. No deal agreed with EU, 2nd ref easily held before end of March, perhaps even as late as in March, anything other than leave win and Brexit is dead.
Whatever the result, 2ndRef easily carries much more weight than first one because what Brexit actually means is infinitely clearer to voters this time. For example, if anyone tries driving “that 350M” bus around next time, it will be laughed out of town.
Whilst many are always keen to put the blame for the current situation firmly at the door of May (including the Leavers who argue the biggest mistake was agreeing to the "backstop"), it seems to me that the Irish situation rests almost entirely on the original starting point to the whole negotiations - the absurd (as many said at the time) insistence that a guarantee on the Irish border was worked out in advance of substanstive discussions about the future trading relationship. And of course the EU are as much to blame in their insistence on this, as much as the British Government (including David Davis...) for agreeing to it. And even more so, because of their total refusal to engage in any discussion about how Brexit was going to work, before Article 50 had been triggered. The agreement of the backstop was (from the UK perspective) clearly an attempt to bypass this absurd pre-condition and move on to genuine discussions about trade. Which was subsequently torpedoed by the EU refusing to move on until it was clarified what the backstop agreement meant.
Many people say that triggering Article 50 was a mistake. But then whilst delaying it might have allowed a benefit of a more consistent negotiating position to be put forward by the UK (although i'm not convinced, because it would have been inevitably characterised as 'cake and eat it' and wouldn't have lasted very long against an EU refusing to budge), if the EU refused to discuss the phasing in advance then wouldn't the same issues have arisen?
Essentially there's a lot of "in hindsight" criticism.
I was flicking through last nights thread where seanT was musing on the diversity of Leavers he knows....A billionaire he's aquainted with ....A French aristo.... The Chinese consort of Ho Chi Minh's billiardboard cleaner.. The principal fluffer at Topkapi Palace.....His 24 year old niece....
It occured to me that I don't knowingly know a single Leaver. Out of a large and (I thought) diverse mix of friends aquaintances work colleagues clients neigbours family hired hands etc I can't think of a single one who has said they are in favour of Brexit.......
Corbyn on Marr just putting forward the same Brexit as TM but he would negotiate better.
He hasn't a clue and prevaricates on second referendum
And some think he will be our next PM
While I think you are right to criticise, I don’t think he’d be much, if any, worse than the current post-holder. In current circumstances and on what appear to be 'sort of’ agreed policies, anyway. be good to see second home owners, including those in London, stuffed, though.
It's quite amusing that not long ago Macron was seen as a template for a magical third party way ahead (Clegg, Miliband, Blair and co. all ganging up to thwart the Tories and Corbyn), and it might just win an election on a wave of public enthusiasm, but it doesn't mean it would be prove effective or popular when in power.
The issues don't magically go away or solve themselves, a third party won't solve them without some deep thinking, and there's fuck all sign that anybody is doing much of that!
Corbyn suggests he would prefer a general election to a second referendum and thinks he can get enough Tory MPs to vote for one so he becomes PM by Christmas, trying to use a customs union to resolve the Irish border issue.
However interestingly he also suggests if the Labour conference votes for a second EU referendum he would be bound by that. If there is No Deal and Labour, LD, SNP MPs and Tory rebels like Soubry and Grieve vote for one it would therefore be more likely than not
He prevaricated over the second referendum and on both Ridge and Marr leading labour politicians including Lisa Nandy and Rebecca Long Bailey clearly do not support a second referendum.
Add in the time frame a second referendum is not going to happen
Thatcher was removed by the “men in grey suits”. She won the ballot in the leadership election but not by enough to keep the confidence of her senior colleagues (which is all the MIGS are).
The Leavers in government (setting aside Johnson who is a self-interested fool) proposed a Canada style FTA. It was Olly Robbins and former Remaibs who messed it up.
A Canada style FTA would have been easier and quicker than most FTAs (because of pre-existing alignment) but that’s not the same as saying it would be quick or easy.
Most FTAs don't have to deliver a solution for Northern Ireland...
And neither does this one.
It’s your friends in the EU who have made this an issue
Thatcher was removed by the “men in grey suits”. She won the ballot in the leadership election but not by enough to keep the confidence of her senior colleagues (which is all the MIGS are).
The Leavers in government (setting aside Johnson who is a self-interested fool) proposed a Canada style FTA. It was Olly Robbins and former Remaibs who messed it up.
A Canada style FTA would have been easier and quicker than most FTAs (because of pre-existing alignment) but that’s not the same as saying it would be quick or easy.
Margaret Thatcher did not win the ballot in the leadership election. There was to be a further round and she withdrew when it became apparent she would lose.
She had amajority but insufficient. (I think 4 votes short of the 2/3 she needed?)
In any event she intended to fight on (wasn’t the quote something like “we fight on, we fight to win”). It was only when the Cabinet came in one by one telling her to quit that she gave up.
What do you think the MIGS are if not your senior colleagues telling you to quit??
Nicky Morgan on Ridge states TM will not lead into the next GE
So both wings of the party want a new leader post Brexit. Betting on TM to go next year must be favourite
Not exactly a shock. Would mean certain defeat for the Tories.
I actually do feel sorry for her. She was handed a poisoned chalice and unfortunately just hasn't got the ability or the guile to take the country out of the present bind.
And, good morning all!
Why certain defeat
And good morning
A GE before 2022 almost certainly sees the Tories lose imo as they will be divided. May leading is part of that division and she would probably lose since shed only lead then into a GE if we get bounced into one soon by utter chaos(though the header us right that doesn't make it simple) in which case I defy someone to explain how the Tories ok polling holds up during a government collapse.
On the latest average polling a new general election would see the Tories win most seats and almost certainly there would be a Tory majority in England but the Tories + DUP would no longer have a majority in the UK and therefore Corbyn would likely become PM with SNP and PC and Green support but reliant on LD votes to get anything through.
The Tories would end up in a similar position to the Nationals in New Zealand last year, the largest party but out of power due to Labour deals with minor parties
Thatcher was removed by the “men in grey suits”. She won the ballot in the leadership election but not by enough to keep the confidence of her senior colleagues (which is all the MIGS are).
The Leavers in government (setting aside Johnson who is a self-interested fool) proposed a Canada style FTA. It was Olly Robbins and former Remaibs who messed it up.
A Canada style FTA would have been easier and quicker than most FTAs (because of pre-existing alignment) but that’s not the same as saying it would be quick or easy.
Most FTAs don't have to deliver a solution for Northern Ireland...
And neither does this one.
It’s your friends in the EU who have made this an issue
How did they make it an issue? By enabling the removal of customs infrastructure in the first place?
On 5 live last night there was a discussion on a poll (not sure which) that showed that in a 2nd referendum 25% would vote remain, 24% hard brexit, 13% Canada +, Chequers 12% and the conclusion was that remain would fail
It is hard not to disagree with that conclusion
Except that is not true, in a Remain v Canada or Chequers vote Remain might fai (a Canada deal is the clear preference of most voters in most polls), in a Remain v hard Brexit scenario as all the polling shows Remain would likely win
On 5 live last night there was a discussion on a poll (not sure which) that showed that in a 2nd referendum 25% would vote remain, 24% hard brexit, 13% Canada +, Chequers 12% and the conclusion was that remain would fail
It is hard not to disagree with that conclusion
Except that is not true, in a Remain v Canada or Chequers vote Remain might fai (a Canada deal is the clear preference of most voters in most polls), in a Remain v hard Brexit scenario as all the polling shows Remain would likely win
Well that was the 5 live conclusion but of course you know best
The EU are going from strength to strength. The UK is going down the toilet. If it wasn't for the inherent good manners of the french and the pragnatism of the Germans they'd say what most of the EU are now thinking. That they no longer want Britain to be part of the EU and 'very close' is probably too close. Reversing Brexit from their point of view isn't an option.
Greece has 20% unemployment, Spain 16% unemployment, Italy 10% unemployment, the UK has the second highest gdp in the EU and the second highest number of contributions to the EU budget and the largest and most wealthy city
Thatcher was removed by the “men in grey suits”. She won the ballot in the leadership election but not by enough to keep the confidence of her senior colleagues (which is all the MIGS are).
The Leavers in government (setting aside Johnson who is a self-interested fool) proposed a Canada style FTA. It was Olly Robbins and former Remaibs who messed it up.
A Canada style FTA would have been easier and quicker than most FTAs (because of pre-existing alignment) but that’s not the same as saying it would be quick or easy.
Most FTAs don't have to deliver a solution for Northern Ireland...
And neither does this one.
It’s your friends in the EU who have made this an issue
How did they make it an issue? By enabling the removal of customs infrastructure in the first place?
By terminating the discussions Kenny had started to find a practical way to handle customs checks without border infrastructure.
It’s physical infrastructure at the border that is the concern not customs checks
On 5 live last night there was a discussion on a poll (not sure which) that showed that in a 2nd referendum 25% would vote remain, 24% hard brexit, 13% Canada +, Chequers 12% and the conclusion was that remain would fail
It is hard not to disagree with that conclusion
Except that is not true, in a Remain v Canada or Chequers vote Remain might fai (a Canada deal is the clear preference of most voters in most polls), in a Remain v hard Brexit scenario as all the polling shows Remain would likely win
Just as it wasn't clear what Brexit meant in the first referendum, it wouldn't be clear what "remain" would mean in the second. It certainly wouldn't be "reset to 2016". The EU's actions in insisting that EU operations run from the UK cease from Brexit day, as opposed to a more lengthy transition once the future relationship became clear (and all the upheaval that has already caused) have ensured that, and i've no doubt the rebate would be gone immediately along with many other British derogations that we would be in no position to maintain.
The UK is now in the last chance saloon and there is no time left to negotiate a bespoke future arrangement with the EU. In order to avoid a disastrous "no deal" Brexit, the only choice is to accept one of the following 2 options: a) a Norway-style association agreement, remaining in the Single Market but not the Customs Union; or: b) a much looser relationship based on Canada's trade deal with the EU. However, in both these cases, the 6 counties would need to stay in the Customs Union.
The Chequers plan is clearly dead (if it was ever alive) because it fragments the Single Market, and the sooner the Maybot acknowledges this the better. Tusk provided an apt illustration by his excellent Instagram joke about cherry picking. Mrs T would have decisively chosen the Norway option - after all, she was the main promoter of the Single Market, but did not believe in Delors-style "ever closer union".
If this incompetent government doesn't face facts soon, bring on a GE - Corbyn would make a better PM, at least from a foreign policy perspective. Not only would Labour deal better with the EU, but there would be a re-orientation of the UK's relationships with criminal racist regimes elsewhere that foment violence, such as Myanmar and Saudi Arabia.
If people want EEA then they are going to have to get a new PM. May could not have been more explicit that it did not deliver on the result of the referendum. I am sure she would resign rather than do this simply because she would have absolutely no credibility left. Even if the fantasies about a cross party group came true, you can't make the PM negotiate whatever Parliament says. I can't see a realistic path to a PM and Government that will pursue EEA. If May resigns any replacement will be a Leaver.
People keep saying that if we go for CETA then NI will have to remain in the CU. This simply is not going to happen (apart from the DUP the whole nation would never wear it). If we go for CETA and the EU will not back down on the backstop, there will be no deal. Which is why No Deal is still the likely outcome.
No Deal likely leads to a second Referendum and Remain then wins.
CETA can only be done with a Norway style transition period while it is negotiated
Is there any chance of a new election in N. Ireland giving a shock to the DUP? If, for example a less intransigent (Brexit-wise) party took a couple of seats from them.
Obviously it would have to be a Unionist of some sort.
I realise, of course that it wouldn’t affect the Westminster Members.
Thatcher was removed by the “men in grey suits”. She won the ballot in the leadership election but not by enough to keep the confidence of her senior colleagues (which is all the MIGS are).
The Leavers in government (setting aside Johnson who is a self-interested fool) proposed a Canada style FTA. It was Olly Robbins and former Remaibs who messed it up.
A Canada style FTA would have been easier and quicker than most FTAs (because of pre-existing alignment) but that’s not the same as saying it would be quick or easy.
Most FTAs don't have to deliver a solution for Northern Ireland...
And neither does this one.
It’s your friends in the EU who have made this an issue
How did they make it an issue? By enabling the removal of customs infrastructure in the first place?
By terminating the discussions Kenny had started to find a practical way to handle customs checks without border infrastructure.
It’s physical infrastructure at the border that is the concern not customs checks
The December agreement still provides for the possibility of a UK-wide solution that avoids infrastructure and checks at the border. The question is how.
By the way you've just contradicted yourself if you're conceding that this hypothetical FTA does indeed need to provide for a border without infrastructure - something that no other FTA delivers.
@FF43 I suspect the EU would carve out some limited exclusions on FoM if we agree to the rest of the package.
I would say the EU's real red lines are 1. Any agreement must not have negative impacts for them. They have the relative power to insist on this. 2. The EU won't change the way it does anything to accommodate UK requirements. 3. Any settlement must be a downgrade / clearly worse for the UK, compared with membership. Negotiation would take place within those parameters. FoM seems like a second order priority for them.
----
1. All exit agreements will have a negative impact on them. The UK opening the door to free trade from elsewhere is a competitive drawback.
2. Agreed.
3. That is in the eye of the beholder though; what they perceive to be a downgrade could well be viewed as an upgrade in the UK. What they consider to be 'benefits' we may consider to be detriments.
1. The EU will lock those down. Any variation on standard Canada or Norway will require the UK to be bound by terms that prevent competitive advantage while having privileged access to the EU market. This assumes No Deal is not viable.
3. The EU doesn't care about opinion in third countries, as Britain will become. It does care about opinion in EU member states. Leaving has to look like a downgrade. That hasn't been a problem so far. Most people in the UK think Brexit will be worse. They are split between those that think it a bad idea and those that blame the EU/May/Remoaners, ie definitely not themselves for having chosen to Leave.
Canada has a free trade deal with the world's biggest economy and our biggest export destination, as well as one with the EU.
If we equalise the terms of access to our market for others,the EU's market share in the UK is sure to decline and that's why the Irish are especially worried.
The EU may not care about our opinion, but nor should we care if we perceive the 'benefits' to be anything but.
In the abstract, yes. If the EU sees its trade fall, we will see ours fall further. We don't sell more to the rest of the world simply because we sell sharply less to our nearest and most important market. Actually it has a knock on effect on the rest of our trade. I would give No Deal a maximum of a couple of weeks before we cave. It won't be pretty and I hope I don't have to test my prediction. After that it's a deal on the EU's terms.
Bear in mind the "benefits" are relative to no deal not the status quo.
The UK is now in the last chance saloon and there is no time left to negotiate a bespoke future arrangement with the EU. In order to avoid a disastrous "no deal" Brexit, the only choice is to accept one of the following 2 options: a) a Norway-style association agreement, remaining in the Single Market but not the Customs Union; or: b) a much looser relationship based on Canada's trade deal with the EU. However, in both these cases, the 6 counties would need to stay in the Customs Union.
The Chequers plan is clearly dead (if it was ever alive) because it fragments the Single Market, and the sooner the Maybot acknowledges this the better. Tusk provided an apt illustration by his excellent Instagram joke about cherry picking. Mrs T would have decisively chosen the Norway option - after all, she was the main promoter of the Single Market, but did not believe in Delors-style "ever closer union".
If this incompetent government doesn't face facts soon, bring on a GE - Corbyn would make a better PM, at least from a foreign policy perspective. Not only would Labour deal better with the EU, but there would be a re-orientation of the UK's relationships with criminal racist regimes elsewhere that foment violence, such as Myanmar and Saudi Arabia.
If people want EEA then they are going to have to get a new PM. May could not have been more explicit that it did not deliver on the result of the referendum. I am sure she would resign rather than do this simply because she would have absolutely no credibility left. Even if the fantasies about a cross party group came true, you can't make the PM negotiate whatever Parliament says. I can't see a realistic path to a PM and Government that will pursue EEA. If May resigns any replacement will be a Leaver.
People keep saying that if we go for CETA then NI will have to remain in the CU. This simply is not going to happen (apart from the DUP the whole nation would never wear it). If we go for CETA and the EU will not back down on the backstop, there will be no deal. Which is why No Deal is still the likely outcome.
No Deal likely leads to a second Referendum and Remain then wins.
CETA can only be done with a Norway style transition period while it is negotiated
You have 2 massive leaps in logic there. No deal doesn't lead to a second Referendum - and remain wouldn't even be an option - as we will have left it would have to be Return (with the Euro and many other things automatically attached)..
Whilst many are always keen to put the blame for the current situation firmly at the door of May (including the Leavers who argue the biggest mistake was agreeing to the "backstop"), it seems to me that the Irish situation rests almost entirely on the original starting point to the whole negotiations - the absurd (as many said at the time) insistence that a guarantee on the Irish border was worked out in advance of substanstive discussions about the future trading relationship. And of course the EU are as much to blame in their insistence on this, as much as the British Government (including David Davis...) for agreeing to it. And even more so, because of their total refusal to engage in any discussion about how Brexit was going to work, before Article 50 had been triggered. The agreement of the backstop was (from the UK perspective) clearly an attempt to bypass this absurd pre-condition and move on to genuine discussions about trade. Which was subsequently torpedoed by the EU refusing to move on until it was clarified what the backstop agreement meant.
Many people say that triggering Article 50 was a mistake. But then whilst delaying it might have allowed a benefit of a more consistent negotiating position to be put forward by the UK (although i'm not convinced, because it would have been inevitably characterised as 'cake and eat it' and wouldn't have lasted very long against an EU refusing to budge), if the EU refused to discuss the phasing in advance then wouldn't the same issues have arisen?
Essentially there's a lot of "in hindsight" criticism.
being in hock to the DUP was a big mistake, though Tories will stoop to any level. They are getting what they deserve by being hostage to those nutters
The UK is now in the last chance saloon and there is no time left to negotiate a bespoke future arrangement with the EU. In order to avoid a disastrous "no deal" Brexit, the only choice is to accept one of the following 2 options: a) a Norway-style association agreement, remaining in the Single Market but not the Customs Union; or: b) a much looser relationship based on Canada's trade deal with the EU. However, in both these cases, the 6 counties would need to stay in the Customs Union.
The Chequers plan is clearly dead (if it was ever alive) because it fragments the Single Market, and the sooner the Maybot acknowledges this the better. Tusk provided an apt illustration by his excellent Instagram joke about cherry picking. Mrs T would have decisively chosen the Norway option - after all, she was the main promoter of the Single Market, but did not believe in Delors-style "ever closer union".
If this incompetent government doesn't face facts soon, bring on a GE - Corbyn would make a better PM, at least from a foreign policy perspective. Not only would Labour deal better with the EU, but there would be a re-orientation of the UK's relationships with criminal racist regimes elsewhere that foment violence, such as Myanmar and Saudi Arabia.
If people want EEA then they are going to have to get a new PM. May could not have been more explicit that it did not deliver on the result of the referendum. I am sure she would resign rather than do this simply because she would have absolutely no credibility left. Even if the fantasies about a cross party group came true, you can't make the PM negotiate whatever Parliament says. I can't see a realistic path to a PM and Government that will pursue EEA. If May resigns any replacement will be a Leaver.
People keep saying that if we go for CETA then NI will have to remain in the CU. This simply is not going to happen (apart from the DUP the whole nation would never wear it). If we go for CETA and the EU will not back down on the backstop, there will be no deal. Which is why No Deal is still the likely outcome.
No Deal likely leads to a second Referendum and Remain then wins.
CETA can only be done with a Norway style transition period while it is negotiated
You have 2 massive leaps in logic there. No deal doesn't lead to a second Referendum - and remain wouldn't even be an option - as we will have left it would have to be Return (with the Euro and many other things automatically attached)..
From the predictions that some people make, "no deal" will be so catastrophic that rejoining the EU will be as a net recipient of EU funds!
Thatcher was removed by the “men in grey suits”. She won the ballot in the leadership election but not by enough to keep the confidence of her senior colleagues (which is all the MIGS are).
The Leavers in government (setting aside Johnson who is a self-interested fool) proposed a Canada style FTA. It was Olly Robbins and former Remaibs who messed it up.
A Canada style FTA would have been easier and quicker than most FTAs (because of pre-existing alignment) but that’s not the same as saying it would be quick or easy.
Most FTAs don't have to deliver a solution for Northern Ireland...
And neither does this one.
It’s your friends in the EU who have made this an issue
How did they make it an issue? By enabling the removal of customs infrastructure in the first place?
By terminating the discussions Kenny had started to find a practical way to handle customs checks without border infrastructure.
It’s physical infrastructure at the border that is the concern not customs checks
The December agreement still provides for the possibility of a UK-wide solution that avoids infrastructure and checks at the border. The question is how.
By the way you've just contradicted yourself if you're conceding that this hypothetical FTA does indeed need to provide for a border without infrastructure - something that no other FTA delivers.
No FTA requires border infrastructure. They require customs checks and controls, not how they are implemented
I was flicking through last nights thread where seanT was musing on the diversity of Leavers he knows....A billionaire he's aquainted with ....A French aristo.... The Chinese consort of Ho Chi Minh's billiardboard cleaner.. The principal fluffer at Topkapi Palace.....His 24 year old niece....
It occured to me that I don't knowingly know a single Leaver. Out of a large and (I thought) diverse mix of friends aquaintances work colleagues clients neigbours family hired hands etc I can't think of a single one who has said they are in favour of Brexit.......
I'm not sure how to interpret this....
Congratulations Roger, even Pauline Kael knew one Nixon voter:
The UK is now in the last chance saloon and there is no time left to negotiate a bespoke future arrangement with the EU. In order to avoid a disastrous "no deal" Brexit, the only choice is to accept one of the following 2 options: a) a Norway-style association agreement, remaining in the Single Market but not the Customs Union; or: b) a much looser relationship based on Canada's trade deal with the EU. However, in both these cases, the 6 counties would need to stay in the Customs Union.
The Chequers plan is clearly dead (if it was ever alive) because it fragments the Single Market, and the sooner the Maybot acknowledges this the better. Tusk provided an apt illustration by his excellent Instagram joke about cherry picking. Mrs T would have decisively chosen the Norway option - after all, she was the main promoter of the Single Market, but did not believe in Delors-style "ever closer union".
If this incompetent government doesn't face facts soon, bring on a GE - Corbyn would make a better PM, at least from a foreign policy perspective. Not only would Labour deal better with the EU, but there would be a re-orientation of the UK's relationships with criminal racist regimes elsewhere that foment violence, such as Myanmar and Saudi Arabia.
If people want EEA then they are going to have to get a new PM. May could not have been more explicit that it did not deliver on the result of the referendum. I am sure she would resign rather than do this simply because she would have absolutely no credibility left. Even if the fantasies about a cross party group came true, you can't make the PM negotiate whatever Parliament says. I can't see a realistic path to a PM and Government that will pursue EEA. If May resigns any replacement will be a Leaver.
People keep saying that ifutcome.
No Deal likely leads to a second Referendum and Remain then wins.
CETA can only be done with a Norway style transition period while it is negotiated
You have 2 massive leaps in logic there. No deal doesn't lead to a second Referendum - and remain wouldn't even be an option - as we will have left it would have to be Return (with the Euro and many other things automatically attached)..
No Deal of course leads to a second EU referendum as there is no way No Deal would get through Parliament as currently constituted without a second referendum (it would probably be before Christmas if the final November talks failed so Remain would still be an option).
Also no evidence whatsoever it would have to include the Euro and no EU official who has said there could be a second referendum has said the Euro would need to be included too (especially given almost half the EU nations are still outside the Euro)
Thatcher was removed by the “men in grey suits”. She won the ballot in the leadership election but not by enough to keep the confidence of her senior colleagues (which is all the MIGS are).
The Leavers in government (setting aside Johnson who is a self-interested fool) proposed a Canada style FTA. It was Olly Robbins and former Remaibs who messed it up.
A Canada style FTA would have been easier and quicker than most FTAs (because of pre-existing alignment) but that’s not the same as saying it would be quick or easy.
Margaret Thatcher did not win the ballot in the leadership election. There was to be a further round and she withdrew when it became apparent she would lose.
She had amajority but insufficient. (I think 4 votes short of the 2/3 she needed?)
In any event she intended to fight on (wasn’t the quote something like “we fight on, we fight to win”). It was only when the Cabinet came in one by one telling her to quit that she gave up.
What do you think the MIGS are if not your senior colleagues telling you to quit??
She summoned the Cabinet to get their views. Her decision was based on counting for the next ballot, not on any idea that “the chaps think it’s time now”. If there was a man in a grey suit that night, it was Denis Thatcher.
Nicky Morgan on Ridge states TM will not lead into the next GE
So both wings of the party want a new leader post Brexit. Betting on TM to go next year must be favourite
Not exactly a shock. Would mean certain defeat for the Tories.
I actually do feel sorry for her. She was handed a poisoned chalice and unfortunately just hasn't got the ability or the guile to take the country out of the present bind.
And, good morning all!
Why certain defeat
And good morning
A GE before 2022 almost certainly sees the Tories lose imo as they will be divided. May leading is part of that division and she would probably lose since shed only lead then into a GE if we get bounced into one soon by utter chaos(though the header us right that doesn't make it simple) in which case I defy someone to explain how the Tories ok polling holds up during a government collapse.
On the latest average polling a new general election would see the Tories win most seats and almost certainly there would be a Tory majority in England ..
...Did..did you not even read what I wrote? It was hypothesizing that the polls would not stay as they are now in the event of a new GE, due to it being caused by a government collapse. I may well be proven incorrect in that guess, but the whole point of the theory was that the polls would not stay the same as now so what they show is largely irrelevant.
On 5 live last night there was a discussion on a poll (not sure which) that showed that in a 2nd referendum 25% would vote remain, 24% hard brexit, 13% Canada +, Chequers 12% and the conclusion was that remain would fail
It is hard not to disagree with that conclusion
Except that is not true, in a Remain v Canada or Chequers vote Remain might fai (a Canada deal is the clear preference of most voters in most polls), in a Remain v hard Brexit scenario as all the polling shows Remain would likely win
Well that was the 5 live conclusion but of course you know best
No based on polling.
All polling shows in a Remain v No Deal scenario Remain would win by around at least 10%.
In a Remain v Canada Deal scenario Canada would probably win (Canada polling shows is also a plurality of voters clear preference for Brexit) but a number of Chequers and Canada supporters would shift to Remain if the alternative was No Deal
No Deal likely leads to a second Referendum and Remain then wins.
CETA can only be done with a Norway style transition period while it is negotiated
You have 2 massive leaps in logic there. No deal doesn't lead to a second Referendum - and remain wouldn't even be an option - as we will have left it would have to be Return (with the Euro and many other things automatically attached)..
No Deal of course leads to a second EU referendum as there is no way No Deal would get through Parliament as currently constituted without a second referendum (it would probably be before Christmas if the final November talks failed so Remain would still be an option).
Also no evidence whatsoever it would have to include the Euro and no EU official who has said there could be a second referendum has said the Euro would need to be included too (especially given almost half the EU nations are still outside the Euro)
No deal doesn't have to get through Parliament. It is the default.
Corbyn suggests he would prefer a general election to a second referendum and thinks he can get enough Tory MPs to vote for one so he becomes PM by Christmas, trying to use a customs union to resolve the Irish border issue.
However interestingly he also suggests if the Labour conference votes for a second EU referendum he would be bound by that. If there is No Deal and Labour, LD, SNP MPs and Tory rebels like Soubry and Grieve vote for one it would therefore be more likely than not
He prevaricated over the second referendum and on both Ridge and Marr leading labour politicians including Lisa Nandy and Rebecca Long Bailey clearly do not support a second referendum.
Add in the time frame a second referendum is not going to happen
Depends what the Labour conference votes for, If there is no Deal a second referendum is inevitable.
On 5 live last night there was a discussion on a poll (not sure which) that showed that in a 2nd referendum 25% would vote remain, 24% hard brexit, 13% Canada +, Chequers 12% and the conclusion was that remain would fail
It is hard not to disagree with that conclusion
Except that is not true, in a Remain v Canada or Chequers vote Remain might fai (a Canada deal is the clear preference of most voters in most polls), in a Remain v hard Brexit scenario as all the polling shows Remain would likely win
Well that was the 5 live conclusion but of course you know best
No based on polling.
All polling shows in a Remain v No Deal scenario Remain would win by around at least 10%.
In a Remain v Canada Deal scenario Canada would probably win (Canada polling shows is also a plurality of voters clear preference for Brexit) but a number of Chequers and Canada supporters would shift to Remain if the alternative was No Deal
"The voters" don't have a clue what "Canada" means. Just as they don't have a clue what "Chequers" means.
Who wins in "no deal" vs "Remain without the rebate"?
On 5 live last night there was a discussion on a poll (not sure which) that showed that in a 2nd referendum 25% would vote remain, 24% hard brexit, 13% Canada +, Chequers 12% and the conclusion was that remain would fail
It is hard not to disagree with that conclusion
Except that is not true, in a Remain v Canada or Chequers vote Remain might fai (a Canada deal is the clear preference of most voters in most polls), in a Remain v hard Brexit scenario as all the polling shows Remain would likely win
Just as it wasn't clear what Brexit meant in the first referendum, it wouldn't be clear what "remain" would mean in the second. It certainly wouldn't be "reset to 2016". The EU's actions in insisting that EU operations run from the UK cease from Brexit day, as opposed to a more lengthy transition once the future relationship became clear (and all the upheaval that has already caused) have ensured that, and i've no doubt the rebate would be gone immediately along with many other British derogations that we would be in no position to maintain.
The rebate would likely be gone but that was going to run out in 2020 anyway
No Deal likely leads to a second Referendum and Remain then wins.
CETA can only be done with a Norway style transition period while it is negotiated
You have 2 massive leaps in logic there. No deal doesn't lead to a second Referendum - and remain wouldn't even be an option - as we will have left it would have to be Return (with the Euro and many other things automatically attached)..
No Deal of course leads to a second EU referendum as there is no way No Deal would get through Parliament as currently constituted without a second referendum (it would probably be before Christmas if the final November talks failed so Remain would still be an option).
Also no evidence whatsoever it would have to include the Euro and no EU official who has said there could be a second referendum has said the Euro would need to be included too (especially given almost half the EU nations are still outside the Euro)
No deal doesn't have to get through Parliament. It is the default.
Not if there is a second referendum which reverses the Brexit vote, indeed if it is held by March Article 50 will have been revoked before we Leave
Corbyn suggests he would prefer a general election to a second referendum and thinks he can get enough Tory MPs to vote for one so he becomes PM by Christmas, trying to use a customs union to resolve the Irish border issue.
However interestingly he also suggests if the Labour conference votes for a second EU referendum he would be bound by that. If there is No Deal and Labour, LD, SNP MPs and Tory rebels like Soubry and Grieve vote for one it would therefore be more likely than not
He prevaricated over the second referendum and on both Ridge and Marr leading labour politicians including Lisa Nandy and Rebecca Long Bailey clearly do not support a second referendum.
Add in the time frame a second referendum is not going to happen
Depends what the Labour conference votes for, If there is no Deal a second referendum is inevitable.
No it’s not. If Theresa May sticks to her guns, how does it get introduced and passed by the House of Commons?
On 5 live last night there was a discussion on a poll (not sure which) that showed that in a 2nd referendum 25% would vote remain, 24% hard brexit, 13% Canada +, Chequers 12% and the conclusion was that remain would fail
It is hard not to disagree with that conclusion
Except that is not true, in a Remain v Canada or Chequers vote Remain might fai (a Canada deal is the clear preference of most voters in most polls), in a Remain v hard Brexit scenario as all the polling shows Remain would likely win
Well that was the 5 live conclusion but of course you know best
No based on polling.
All polling shows in a Remain v No Deal scenario Remain would win by around at least 10%.
In a Remain v Canada Deal scenario Canada would probably win (Canada polling shows is also a plurality of voters clear preference for Brexit) but a number of Chequers and Canada supporters would shift to Remain if the alternative was No Deal
"The voters" don't have a clue what "Canada" means. Just as they don't have a clue what "Chequers" means.
Who wins in "no deal" vs "Remain without the rebate"?
Remain would win even without the Rebate given No Deal as the alternative.
Voters are not stupid, they know Canada is a FTA and that is what would be their ideal scenario, they also no No Deal would be disastrous for the economy.
If Brexiteers are stupid enough to force No Deal Brexit then it will be RIP Brexit as all the viable Brexit options ie a Norway or Canada scenario, will have gone
Corbyn suggests he would prefer a general election to a second referendum and thinks he can get enough Tory MPs to vote for one so he becomes PM by Christmas, trying to use a customs union to resolve the Irish border issue.
However interestingly he also suggests if the Labour conference votes for a second EU referendum he would be bound by that. If there is No Deal and Labour, LD, SNP MPs and Tory rebels like Soubry and Grieve vote for one it would therefore be more likely than not
He prevaricated over the second referendum and on both Ridge and Marr leading labour politicians including Lisa Nandy and Rebecca Long Bailey clearly do not support a second referendum.
Add in the time frame a second referendum is not going to happen
Depends what the Labour conference votes for, If there is no Deal a second referendum is inevitable.
I would expect a hypothetical generic "remain vs no deal" referendum (in February?) to result in a massive slump in turnout. Leave voters would stay at home en masse because they would see it as a fix and the outcome inevitable (after all its sole purpose would be to ensure the UK remains in the EU and they would quite possibly expect the outcome to be ignored if it actually resulted in a Leave victory). We would be staying in the EU but on the back of zero democratic legitimacy. Where it goes from there, who know?
Comments
I actually do feel sorry for her. She was handed a poisoned chalice and unfortunately just hasn't got the ability or the guile to take the country out of the present bind.
And, good morning all!
And good morning
He would probably vote remain but not sure
Not only EU doing lots of fudge, labour catching up
Edit: Also it gives more justification for his no critics to justify not flouncing out if the party over brexit as some reports laughably claim some might - as the party under Corbyn would have offered an ref to those very remainy mps, but never got the chance.
'The choice before the country is brutal. It is between the world heralded by the Anglo-American rightwing thinktanks or European liberal social democracy.'
It's a common argument but I've never been sure I buy it entirely. Does leaving the EU mean our only option is the worldview espoused by rightwing thinktanks? It won't be very appetising for most voters - particularly the detail on environmental standards. Does anyone have an alternative vision of Brexit other than the 'maintain the benefits but not the obligations' fantasy?
You can argue it's just a clever piece of black and white thinking by Hutton but if Leavers can't actually spell out a vision I'll start to come round to the 2nd referendum/general election idea.
I would say the EU's real red lines are 1. Any agreement must not have negative impacts for them. They have the relative power to insist on this. 2. The EU won't change the way it does anything to accommodate UK requirements. 3. Any settlement must be a downgrade / clearly worse for the UK, compared with membership. Negotiation would take place within those parameters. FoM seems like a second order priority for them.
Regardless, we would need to go for a Norway arrangement if we are to avoid chaos and take our chances on the FoM component.
Edit. The FoM negotiation won't take place for several years. It's reasonable that we won't at that stage be bound by interpretations of an old referendum that didn't include any reference to immigration.
There's no possible course of action that any Government of any stripe could ever take that wouldn't displease him, and that he wouldn't oppose.
The Dublin Convention was clearly constructed by the clinically insane (or the EU).
It is simply not conceivable that Italy & Spain & Greece & Malta can survive with the rest of the EU simply saying (as Idiot Macron does) "these countries must live up to their responsibilities".
The Dublin Convention (as it stands) puts an insuperable burden on a few countries, and is just manifestly unfair. It will lead to governments in all these countries that make the present Italian Government look sweet & docile.
Ultimately, the migration that will likely continue for the foreseeable future from Africa & the Middle East has to be a shared responsibility of the whole of the EU, not just a few states that by accident of geography are the ones in which migrants land.
If the EU are not thinking too much about Brexit, it is because they have still more insuperable problems to solve.
It occured to me that I don't knowingly know a single Leaver. Out of a large and (I thought) diverse mix of friends aquaintances work colleagues clients neigbours family hired hands etc I can't think of a single one who has said they are in favour of Brexit.......
I'm not sure how to interpret this....
'Were legislation introduced the day parliament returned from recess, on 9 October, the earliest Thursday on which a referendum could be held would be 28 March - the very day before exit day.’
Not entirely sure that’s true as if Parliament were largely supportive the necessary legislation could be quicker, but it does provide a cautionary note of practicality.
Burnham, Cooper, Kendall, Smith, & May all made the mistake of underestimating his campaigning ability.
It is possible (though one can never be entirely sure with politicians) that "lessons have been learnt".
I think it should be in 2 parts
Q1
1) I Accept
2) I Reject
Q2 Only applicable if I reject wins
1) Leave with no deal
2)Abandon BREXIT
2) 1) for me
Of course the preferable option is that there is no 2nd Referendum
That will mean a compromise on all sides, so all can take something away from it, and must include for respecting the UK's constitutional integrity in a politically obvious way whilst also giving NI special status within the EU. I'd therefore expect soft-ish checks on some agricultural goods/products by exception both between Eire/NI *and* between NI/GB. I'd expect that to be wrapped up in some overarching political statement that gives succour to all sides all round.
The rest will come down to deal sweetening (i.e. money), a bit of can-kicking and some political punch & judy.
Why do we have a Parliament/politicians? Basically so that someone else can do ‘that sort of thinking’ for us.
It honestly seems so vastly unknowable I have no clue.
Remainers have unwisely spent their time chasing a rainbow.
"Saddle up the unicorns, we've a People's Vote to chase down...."
Although I suppose enough money to fix the fuel (or whatever it was) scam might.
Many of us have learnt to keep stumm at social events out of a desire for a nice relatively quiet evening for fear of provoking some sanctimonious rant dripping in virtue signalling goo.
Always one step ahead of the EU is the UK!
The Leavers in government (setting aside Johnson who is a self-interested fool) proposed a Canada style FTA. It was Olly Robbins and former Remaibs who messed it up.
A Canada style FTA would have been easier and quicker than most FTAs (because of pre-existing alignment) but that’s not the same as saying it would be quick or easy.
Why is that the case?
3. The EU doesn't care about opinion in third countries, as Britain will become. It does care about opinion in EU member states. Leaving has to look like a downgrade. That hasn't been a problem so far. Most people in the UK think Brexit will be worse. They are split between those that think it a bad idea and those that blame the EU/May/Remoaners, ie definitely not themselves for having chosen to Leave.
Although the howling about ‘respecting the People’s Vote” would be loud and long.
I don’t see an end to this coming in my lifetime; I’m 80.
Although I’m reasonably fit and, more or less, compos mentis.
I'd also question how such a turn of events would occur. Who calls the vote, and how? Who then votes to revoke Article 50?
He hasn't a clue and prevaricates on second referendum
And some think he will be our next PM
However interestingly he also suggests if the Labour conference votes for a second EU referendum he would be bound by that. If there is No Deal and Labour, LD, SNP MPs and Tory rebels like Soubry and Grieve vote for one it would therefore be more likely than not
So there will still be a load of people who think he is pro-Brexit and equally those who think he is anti-Brexit regardless of what crap comes out of his mouth.
Corbyns business managers, seeing that there will be 2ndRef conference vote and will lose it, now change position so it’s not talked up as a defeat. Could it really be a defeat for them anyway, if it’s not high on their priority list, not particularly crucial to either Corbyns leadership survival or his Premiership when in Downing Street? More importantly they probably feel they must sideline Watson’s noises on this week so he can’t take any credit.
However. For anyone who would dearly love Brexit to happen, or dearly love Theresa May to survive, this moment when it inevitably comes just adds a bit more of fear factor. This is a policy about 99% of the Labour PLP could come together on, a strong voting block. No deal agreed with EU, 2nd ref easily held before end of March, perhaps even as late as in March, anything other than leave win and Brexit is dead.
Whatever the result, 2ndRef easily carries much more weight than first one because what Brexit actually means is infinitely clearer to voters this time. For example, if anyone tries driving “that 350M” bus around next time, it will be laughed out of town.
Many people say that triggering Article 50 was a mistake. But then whilst delaying it might have allowed a benefit of a more consistent negotiating position to be put forward by the UK (although i'm not convinced, because it would have been inevitably characterised as 'cake and eat it' and wouldn't have lasted very long against an EU refusing to budge), if the EU refused to discuss the phasing in advance then wouldn't the same issues have arisen?
Essentially there's a lot of "in hindsight" criticism.
Does that put your mind at rest?
be good to see second home owners, including those in London, stuffed, though.
That's what Nazi war criminals used to say.
The issues don't magically go away or solve themselves, a third party won't solve them without some deep thinking, and there's fuck all sign that anybody is doing much of that!
Add in the time frame a second referendum is not going to happen
It’s your friends in the EU who have made this an issue
In any event she intended to fight on (wasn’t the quote something like “we fight on, we fight to win”). It was only when the Cabinet came in one by one telling her to quit that she gave up.
What do you think the MIGS are if not your senior colleagues telling you to quit??
The Tories would end up in a similar position to the Nationals in New Zealand last year, the largest party but out of power due to Labour deals with minor parties
Alas.
It’s physical infrastructure at the border that is the concern not customs checks
CETA can only be done with a Norway style transition period while it is negotiated
By the way you've just contradicted yourself if you're conceding that this hypothetical FTA does indeed need to provide for a border without infrastructure - something that no other FTA delivers.
Bear in mind the "benefits" are relative to no deal not the status quo.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pauline_Kael#Nixon_quote
Might I recommend a relocation to Hartlepool to widen the horizons of your niche provincialism
Also no evidence whatsoever it would have to include the Euro and no EU official who has said there could be a second referendum has said the Euro would need to be included too (especially given almost half the EU nations are still outside the Euro)
All polling shows in a Remain v No Deal scenario Remain would win by around at least 10%.
In a Remain v Canada Deal scenario Canada would probably win (Canada polling shows is also a plurality of voters clear preference for Brexit) but a number of Chequers and Canada supporters would shift to Remain if the alternative was No Deal
Who wins in "no deal" vs "Remain without the rebate"?
Voters are not stupid, they know Canada is a FTA and that is what would be their ideal scenario, they also no No Deal would be disastrous for the economy.
If Brexiteers are stupid enough to force No Deal Brexit then it will be RIP Brexit as all the viable Brexit options ie a Norway or Canada scenario, will have gone
Article 50 being passed makes leaving the default.