politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The harsh truth is that the next General Election is in May 20

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The harsh truth is that the next General Election is in May 2022 and only the Tories have the power to hold it earlier

Ever since June 9th last year politics has been going through rather a strange phase. The biggest losing party, LAB, acted as though it was the winner and the main winning party, CON, acted as though it had lost.

Read the full story here

OldKingCole

Doesn’t the FTPA have to be reviewed in 2020? Could, IIRC, be significantly amended or even revoked.

Oh, and First!

MikeSmithson

OldKingCole said:

Doesn’t the FTPA have to be reviewed in 2020? Could, IIRC, be significantly amended or even revoked.

Oh, and First!

Yes. But that would require legislation

Hertsmere_Pubgoer

Must say I didn't know it was David Davis advice on last year. Not one of my better nights betting. I felt lucky that I only ran in at a loss of about £50

TheJezziah

After the deal with the DUP was signed I didn't expect an election until 2019 earliest.

With that being the Brexit date and May likely to go at that point with her replacement wanting a little time to bed in before going to the country that probably adds at least another year or so.

I wouldn't be surprised to have to wait until 2021 for an election if not going full term to 2022.

currystar

Jonathan said:

» show previous quotes
The Tory administration post 2015 is a different administration to the LibDem-Tory coalition 2010-2015. The latter, whilst flawed, is several leagues ahead of this dire administration. I would rank most governments post-1945 above this one. The coalition was mid-tier.

So how much has this Government got the deficit down to in the past 3 years? What is the current unemployment rate?? And yet you think this is the worst governnment since 1945? Look around at this country, it is booming, compare it to the late 1970s, do you think the Callaghan Government begging the IMF for money was a more competent Government?

HYUFD

Provided May gets a Deal with the EU 2022 is very likely to be the next general election date, if no deal, a second EU referendum is more likely than an early general election especially with the likes of Tory MPs like Amber Rudd now backing a 'People's Vote' if no deal

rottenborough

Morning all,

An excellent thread on ideas and the future, to follow up my point from last night. In this case a former MP says Labour haven't got ideas for the future:

https://twitter.com/JamieFonzarelli/status/1045068119088271361

Big_G_NorthWales

HYUFD said:

Provided May gets a Deal with the EU 2022 is very likely to be the next general election date, if no deal, a second EU referendum is more likely than an early general election especially with the likes of Tory MPs like Amber Rudd now backing a 'People's Vote' if no deal

TM deal or no deal will soon be apparent. I know we all like making projections of what may happen but in such an uncertain climate none of us can be certain

I do believe Canada +++ is dead following last nights declaration by the DUP that they reject ERG's proposition and of course this mornings news of how Trump has sabotaged the WTO and its ability to arbitrate delivered the coup d'etat

I would suggest there is now a Parliamentary majority for Norway ++ and maybe TM is running down the clock to the point there is no time left to either take the deal or yes, I agree a second referendum ( as long as it is called that) may well be on the table.

Amber Rudd of course is fighting for her seat and may have other reasons for calling for a second referendum but no deal and WTO seems increasingly unlikely.

And my apologises to WilliamGlenn for debunking his notion on a second referendum, he may be right and when I am wrong I do like to say so

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Borough, at least one Labour MP wants to party like it's 1926.

"Give us what we want or we'll try and make the whole country go on strike."

Sandpit

Good piece Mike, as you say there’s very little chance of an election soon, especially not before Brexit happens.

A VoNC in the Government requires either the DUP to vote against (not just abstain) or seven Conservative defectors to cross the floor and most likely lose their seats in the process. In either case there’s a two week period for another Conservative leader to try and reconcile the rebels before an election happens.

A number of government losses in by-elections could also lead to problems later in the cycle, but that’s not an immediate problem.

Sandpit

HYUFD said:

Provided May gets a Deal with the EU 2022 is very likely to be the next general election date, if no deal, a second EU referendum is more likely than an early general election especially with the likes of Tory MPs like Amber Rudd now backing a 'People's Vote' if no deal

All those wishing a second referendum to happen are still failing to explain how the required legislation comes about procedurally, if the government doesn’t propose it.

GarethoftheVale2

Big_G_NorthWales said:

HYUFD said:

Provided May gets a Deal with the EU 2022 is very likely to be the next general election date, if no deal, a second EU referendum is more likely than an early general election especially with the likes of Tory MPs like Amber Rudd now backing a 'People's Vote' if no deal

TM deal or no deal will soon be apparent. I know we all like making projections of what may happen but in such an uncertain climate none of us can be certain

I do believe Canada +++ is dead following last nights declaration by the DUP that they reject ERG's proposition and of course this mornings news of how Trump has sabotaged the WTO and its ability to arbitrate delivered the coup d'etat

I would suggest there is now a Parliamentary majority for Norway ++ and maybe TM is running down the clock to the point there is no time left to either take the deal or yes, I agree a second referendum ( as long as it is called that) may well be on the table.

Amber Rudd of course is fighting for her seat and may have other reasons for calling for a second referendum but no deal and WTO seems increasingly unlikely.

And my apologises to WilliamGlenn for debunking his notion on a second referendum, he may be right and when I am wrong I do like to say so

The problem with a 2nd referendum is that parliament can force the executive to hold one and both May and Corbyn are against one.

GarethoftheVale2

GarethoftheVale2 said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

HYUFD said:

Provided May gets a Deal with the EU 2022 is very likely to be the next general election date, if no deal, a second EU referendum is more likely than an early general election especially with the likes of Tory MPs like Amber Rudd now backing a 'People's Vote' if no deal

TM deal or no deal will soon be apparent. I know we all like making projections of what may happen but in such an uncertain climate none of us can be certain

I do believe Canada +++ is dead following last nights declaration by the DUP that they reject ERG's proposition and of course this mornings news of how Trump has sabotaged the WTO and its ability to arbitrate delivered the coup d'etat

I would suggest there is now a Parliamentary majority for Norway ++ and maybe TM is running down the clock to the point there is no time left to either take the deal or yes, I agree a second referendum ( as long as it is called that) may well be on the table.

Amber Rudd of course is fighting for her seat and may have other reasons for calling for a second referendum but no deal and WTO seems increasingly unlikely.

And my apologises to WilliamGlenn for debunking his notion on a second referendum, he may be right and when I am wrong I do like to say so

The problem with a 2nd referendum is that parliament can force the executive to hold one and both May and Corbyn are against one.

Cannot

archer101au

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Yesterday the DUP rejected the Canada deal and overnight reports from the US have confirmed that Trump is refusing to appoint judges to the WTO and that he wants root and branch change to it.

It is in crisis as the arbitration system collapses due to lack of judges.

A double blow to ERG

The DUP certainly did not say that Canada was dead. What they said was that the paper released on Monday contained too many grey areas in relation to NI regulations for them to support it as written. The fundamental basis of the paper - an FTA with a soft border in NI at the land border is fully supported by the DUP. This was not an official DUP statement (unlike those which reject the backstop), it was the DUP just reminding everyone that they will need to be brought along on the border solution re CETA. Translation - they will want to be paid off.

Do remember that the DUP have rejected outright the Chequers plan because it involves an NI backstop and they have always been opposed to Norway. The only plan they ever supported was an FTA, mainly of course because they want regulations to diverge with ROI because it makes it harder to get a united Ireland later.

You are over-reading this.

RochdalePioneers

An election remains unlikely. But these are unlikely times. I don't see a deal that will be acceptable by both Tory MPs and the EU - one or the other will come up with something "new" but won't actually have listened (again) to the red lines of the other side.

So we get to an impasse. Government in office but not in power. Unable to do a deal, unable NOT to do a deal (even in its most defiant rhetoric, the government know that no deal is the end of them). So we need to reframe and go bigger. A General Election or a Referendum on No Deal.

In ordinary times these options absolutely would not happen. But these are desperate times...

AlastairMeeks

As others have said, something will have to give. If the government does continue to 2022, it's not going to be a happy ship.

Dura_Ace

RochdalePioneers said:

So we get to an impasse. Government in office but not in power. Unable to do a deal, unable NOT to do a deal (even in its most defiant rhetoric, the government know that no deal is the end of them). So we need to reframe and go bigger. A General Election or a Referendum on No Deal.

Brexit is a revolution and revolutions need political theorists who can cast the new order. Brexit didn't have the Lenin or Mirabeau it needed. It had David Davis who, to quote Houston, has all the qualities of a dog except loyalty.

Big_G_NorthWales

GarethoftheVale2 said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

HYUFD said:

Provided May gets a Deal with the EU 2022 is very likely to be the next general election date, if no deal, a second EU referendum is more likely than an early general election especially with the likes of Tory MPs like Amber Rudd now backing a 'People's Vote' if no deal

TM deal or no deal will soon be apparent. I know we all like making projections of what may happen but in such an uncertain climate none of us can be certain

I do believe Canada +++ is dead following last nights declaration by the DUP that they reject ERG's proposition and of course this mornings news of how Trump has sabotaged the WTO and its ability to arbitrate delivered the coup d'etat

I would suggest there is now a Parliamentary majority for Norway ++ and maybe TM is running down the clock to the point there is no time left to either take the deal or yes, I agree a second referendum ( as long as it is called that) may well be on the table.

Amber Rudd of course is fighting for her seat and may have other reasons for calling for a second referendum but no deal and WTO seems increasingly unlikely.

And my apologises to WilliamGlenn for debunking his notion on a second referendum, he may be right and when I am wrong I do like to say so

The problem with a 2nd referendum is that parliament can force the executive to hold one and both May and Corbyn are against one.

I agree but if TM loses her deal the choice for the nation is stark and at that point TM will need to take a decision in the national interest and who knows, if her party is behind her, excluding the ERG it could happen. But as I said earlier it is impossible to game this

TOPPING

archer101au said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Yesterday the DUP rejected the Canada deal and overnight reports from the US have confirmed that Trump is refusing to appoint judges to the WTO and that he wants root and branch change to it.

It is in crisis as the arbitration system collapses due to lack of judges.

A double blow to ERG

The DUP certainly did not say that Canada was dead. What they said was that the paper released on Monday contained too many grey areas in relation to NI regulations for them to support it as written. The fundamental basis of the paper - an FTA with a soft border in NI at the land border is fully supported by the DUP. This was not an official DUP statement (unlike those which reject the backstop), it was the DUP just reminding everyone that they will need to be brought along on the border solution re CETA. Translation - they will want to be paid off.

Do remember that the DUP have rejected outright the Chequers plan because it involves an NI backstop and they have always been opposed to Norway. The only plan they ever supported was an FTA, mainly of course because they want regulations to diverge with ROI because it makes it harder to get a united Ireland later.

You are over-reading this.

And the question then becomes does their desire as you say to cement differences in (regulatory, customs, whatever) regime overcome just about everyone else's desire for a deal. Without the DUP there would be a border in the Irish Sea in a heartbeat, called something else, obvs as a border would be illegal. It really is a who governs Britain moment and we know what happened the last time round.

So on topic, would the DUP threat to derail any deal and crash out be sufficient for May to call an election for a mandate for whatever deal she had agreed (this time) with the EU?

Big_G_NorthWales

archer101au said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Yesterday the DUP rejected the Canada deal and overnight reports from the US have confirmed that Trump is refusing to appoint judges to the WTO and that he wants root and branch change to it.

It is in crisis as the arbitration system collapses due to lack of judges.

A double blow to ERG

The DUP certainly did not say that Canada was dead. What they said was that the paper released on Monday contained too many grey areas in relation to NI regulations for them to support it as written. The fundamental basis of the paper - an FTA with a soft border in NI at the land border is fully supported by the DUP. This was not an official DUP statement (unlike those which reject the backstop), it was the DUP just reminding everyone that they will need to be brought along on the border solution re CETA. Translation - they will want to be paid off.

Do remember that the DUP have rejected outright the Chequers plan because it involves an NI backstop and they have always been opposed to Norway. The only plan they ever supported was an FTA, mainly of course because they want regulations to diverge with ROI because it makes it harder to get a united Ireland later.

You are over-reading this.

Do you know, I do not think I am.

TM has the backing of her cabinet and the DUP rejects ERG proposals.

The WTO are in disarray following Trump's idiotic interventions.

Labour are indicating they could back a deal that prevents no deal

The mood music is shifting but I believe TM deal will be accepted by the HOC but if not anything could happen

The ERG account for not more than 50 diehards and that is dwarfed by the other 600

Philip_Thompson

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Do you know, I do not think I am.

TM has the backing of her cabinet and the DUP rejects ERG proposals.

The WTO are in disarray following Trump's idiotic interventions.

Labour are indicating they could back a deal that prevents no deal

The mood music is shifting but I believe TM deal will be accepted by the HOC but if not anything could happen

The ERG account for not more than 50 diehards and that is dwarfed by the other 600

Again the DUP don't reject ERG proposals they reject Chequers.

Big_G_NorthWales

RochdalePioneers said:

An election remains unlikely. But these are unlikely times. I don't see a deal that will be acceptable by both Tory MPs and the EU - one or the other will come up with something "new" but won't actually have listened (again) to the red lines of the other side.

So we get to an impasse. Government in office but not in power. Unable to do a deal, unable NOT to do a deal (even in its most defiant rhetoric, the government know that no deal is the end of them). So we need to reframe and go bigger. A General Election or a Referendum on No Deal.

In ordinary times these options absolutely would not happen. But these are desperate times...

Tell me how a GE changes anything unless Corbyn puts a second referendum in his manifesto and that was categorically ruled out last night.

The only thing that could change matters is a second referendum but at present the path to that is unclear, However, it must now have a chance one way or the other

Big_G_NorthWales

AlastairMeeks said:

As others have said, something will have to give. If the government does continue to 2022, it's not going to be a happy ship.

I think that is maybe wishful thinking.

Scott_P

https://twitter.com/FraserNelson/status/1045244576032854016

Big_G_NorthWales

Dura_Ace said:

RochdalePioneers said:

So we get to an impasse. Government in office but not in power. Unable to do a deal, unable NOT to do a deal (even in its most defiant rhetoric, the government know that no deal is the end of them). So we need to reframe and go bigger. A General Election or a Referendum on No Deal.

Brexit is a revolution and revolutions need political theorists who can cast the new order. Brexit didn't have the Lenin or Mirabeau it needed. It had David Davis who, to quote Houston, has all the qualities of a dog except loyalty.

Excuse me, my wife would say dogs have lots of qualities.

My dear late Father used to say the more you see of people the more you like your dog

Big_G_NorthWales

Philip_Thompson said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Do you know, I do not think I am.

TM has the backing of her cabinet and the DUP rejects ERG proposals.

The WTO are in disarray following Trump's idiotic interventions.

Labour are indicating they could back a deal that prevents no deal

The mood music is shifting but I believe TM deal will be accepted by the HOC but if not anything could happen

The ERG account for not more than 50 diehards and that is dwarfed by the other 600

Again the DUP don't reject ERG proposals they reject Chequers.

They rejected it last night as per this forum's references to their statement

AlastairMeeks

Big_G_NorthWales said:

AlastairMeeks said:

As others have said, something will have to give. If the government does continue to 2022, it's not going to be a happy ship.

I think that is maybe wishful thinking.

Which bit? I can't see many of the camps in the Conservative party doing cartwheels, whatever the outcome is.

anothernick

Big_G_NorthWales said:

GarethoftheVale2 said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

HYUFD said:

Provided May gets a Deal with the EU 2022 is very likely to be the next general election date, if no deal, a second EU referendum is more likely than an early general election especially with the likes of Tory MPs like Amber Rudd now backing a 'People's Vote' if no deal

TM deal or no deal will soon be apparent. I know we all like making projections of what may happen but in such an uncertain climate none of us can be certain

I do believe Canada +++ is dead following last nights declaration by the DUP that they reject ERG's proposition and of course this mornings news of how Trump has sabotaged the WTO and its ability to arbitrate delivered the coup d'etat

I would suggest there is now a Parliamentary majority for Norway ++ and maybe TM is running down the clock to the point there is no time left to either take the deal or yes, I agree a second referendum ( as long as it is called that) may well be on the table.

Amber Rudd of course is fighting for her seat and may have other reasons for calling for a second referendum but no deal and WTO seems increasingly unlikely.

And my apologises to WilliamGlenn for debunking his notion on a second referendum, he may be right and when I am wrong I do like to say so

The problem with a 2nd referendum is that parliament can force the executive to hold one and both May and Corbyn are against one.

I agree but if TM loses her deal the choice for the nation is stark and at that point TM will need to take a decision in the national interest and who knows, if her party is behind her, excluding the ERG it could happen. But as I said earlier it is impossible to game this

The entire Brexit process including the referendum and shambolic attempts at negotiation have been driven by Tory Party interests. The national interest is nowhere. It seems very unlikely that May will be willing or capable of taking a decision in the national interest or that the Tory party would allow her to do so even if she wanted to.

williamglenn

AlastairMeeks said:

As others have said, something will have to give. If the government does continue to 2022, it's not going to be a happy ship.

If we did have a second referendum resulting in a big win for Remain, some of the more dedicated Brexiteers might decide to bow out of politics.

Big_G_NorthWales

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/FraserNelson/status/1045244576032854016

Emma Barnett for me but does anyone watch it

I do not know why any man is quoted. Not a chance in this climate

tlg86

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/FraserNelson/status/1045244576032854016

Emma Barnett for me but does anyone watch it

I do not know why any man is quoted. Not a chance in this climate

Evan Davis got the PM gig so I wouldn't rule out a man getting QT. Probably a market to avoid in all honesty.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. P, shame. Sophie Raworth is much underrated, I think.

She and Andrew Neil should anchor election night coverage.

Big_G_NorthWales

williamglenn said:

AlastairMeeks said:

As others have said, something will have to give. If the government does continue to 2022, it's not going to be a happy ship.

If we did have a second referendum resulting in a big win for Remain, some of the more dedicated Brexiteers might decide to bow out of politics.

I apologised to you earlier for my view that a second referendum would not happen. I now believe it is a possibility but I am not at all certain how it comes about

Sandpit

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/FraserNelson/status/1045244576032854016

Back all the women. It’s already been said informally that it’s the most important of the selection criteria.

eek

Sandpit said:

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/FraserNelson/status/1045244576032854016

Back all the women. It’s already been said informally that it’s the most important of the selection criteria.

I wouldn't be betting on Kirsty Young - her Fibromyalgia probably rules out such a continual program...

archer101au

TOPPING said:

archer101au said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Yesterday the DUP rejected the Canada deal and overnight reports from the US have confirmed that Trump is refusing to appoint judges to the WTO and that he wants root and branch change to it.

It is in crisis as the arbitration system collapses due to lack of judges.

A double blow to ERG

The DUP certainly did not say that Canada was dead. What they said was that the paper released on Monday contained too many grey areas in relation to NI regulations for them to support it as written. The fundamental basis of the paper - an FTA with a soft border in NI at the land border is fully supported by the DUP. This was not an official DUP statement (unlike those which reject the backstop), it was the DUP just reminding everyone that they will need to be brought along on the border solution re CETA. Translation - they will want to be paid off.

Do remember that the DUP have rejected outright the Chequers plan because it involves an NI backstop and they have always been opposed to Norway. The only plan they ever supported was an FTA, mainly of course because they want regulations to diverge with ROI because it makes it harder to get a united Ireland later.

You are over-reading this.

And the question then becomes does their desire as you say to cement differences in (regulatory, customs, whatever) regime overcome just about everyone else's desire for a deal. Without the DUP there would be a border in the Irish Sea in a heartbeat, called something else, obvs as a border would be illegal. It really is a who governs Britain moment and we know what happened the last time round.

So on topic, would the DUP threat to derail any deal and crash out be sufficient for May to call an election for a mandate for whatever deal she had agreed (this time) with the EU?

Conservatives will never support a border in the Irish Sea and neither will most people in the UK. There is no good reason for it to happen so you are basically asking people to vote for the humiliation of the UK. If she called an election on that basis she would lose.

It is not the DUP's fault we are in this mess - that lies with Theresa May who went down the backstop road so she could get her good headlines in December without apparently having any idea that the DUP would reject it or that it would be impossible to deliver.

Cyclefree

AlastairMeeks said:

As others have said, something will have to give. If the government does continue to 2022, it's not going to be a happy ship.

Maybe we should take the Belgian option.

Hertsmere_Pubgoer

Sandpit said:

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/FraserNelson/status/1045244576032854016

Back all the women. It’s already been said informally that it’s the most important of the selection criteria.

It ahould have dual presenters.
Katie Hopkins and Owen Jones, now that would be fun

archer101au

Big_G_NorthWales said:

HYUFD said:

Provided May gets a Deal with the EU 2022 is very likely to be the next general election date, if no deal, a second EU referendum is more likely than an early general election especially with the likes of Tory MPs like Amber Rudd now backing a 'People's Vote' if no deal

TM deal or no deal will soon be apparent. I know we all like making projections of what may happen but in such an uncertain climate none of us can be certain

There is no TM deal, which was sort of the point of last week. Let's put this in perspective - we are about four weeks away from abandoning negotiations and the two parties are not even talking to each other - both are waiting in vain for proposals from the other side!

Cyclefree

Sandpit said:

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/FraserNelson/status/1045244576032854016

Back all the women. It’s already been said informally that it’s the most important of the selection criteria.

Why? The best person surely. Or am I being stupidly old-fashioned?

Kirsty Wark has left Desert Island Discs because of illness so not sure that she’s up to it. Can’t stand Emily Maitlis - she cannot ask a succint pointed question to save her life.

TOPPING

archer101au said:

TOPPING said:

archer101au said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Yesterday the DUP rejected the Canada deal and overnight reports from the US have confirmed that Trump is refusing to appoint judges to the WTO and that he wants root and branch change to it.

It is in crisis as the arbitration system collapses due to lack of judges.

A double blow to ERG

The DUP certainly did not say that Canada was dborder solution re CETA. Translation - they will want to be paid off.

Do remember that the DUP have rejected outright the Chequers plan because it involves an NI backstop and they have always been opposed to Norway. The only plan they ever supported was an FTA, mainly of course because they want regulations to diverge with ROI because it makes it harder to get a united Ireland later.

You are over-reading this.

And the question then becomes does their desire as you say to cement differences in (regulatory, customs, whatever) regime overcome just about everyone else's desire for a deal. Without the DUP there would be a border in the Irish Sea in a heartbeat, called something else, obvs as a border would be illegal. It really is a who governs Britain moment and we know what happened the last time round.

So on topic, would the DUP threat to derail any deal and crash out be sufficient for May to call an election for a mandate for whatever deal she had agreed (this time) with the EU?

Conservatives will never support a border in the Irish Sea and neither will most people in the UK. There is no good reason for it to happen so you are basically asking people to vote for the humiliation of the UK. If she called an election on that basis she would lose.

It is not the DUP's fault we are in this mess - that lies with Theresa May who went down the backstop road so she could get her good headlines in December without apparently having any idea that the DUP would reject it or that it would be impossible to deliver.

You're over-dramatising. There are plenty of regulatory divergences today between the mainland and the six counties *cough* abortion *cough* and that doesn't have Jacob marching on Parliament, now, does it? Does anyone call it a break up of the UK? Do people believe that this, arguably fundamental, divergence between regulatory environments constitutes a "border"?

No of course not; no one would care or notice if there is a different widget regulatory authorisation system in NI vs GB.

Philip_Thompson

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Do you know, I do not think I am.

TM has the backing of her cabinet and the DUP rejects ERG proposals.

The WTO are in disarray following Trump's idiotic interventions.

Labour are indicating they could back a deal that prevents no deal

The mood music is shifting but I believe TM deal will be accepted by the HOC but if not anything could happen

The ERG account for not more than 50 diehards and that is dwarfed by the other 600

Again the DUP don't reject ERG proposals they reject Chequers.

They rejected it last night as per this forum's references to their statement

No they didn't. The stated their concerns but they didn't reject it.

RochdalePioneers

Big_G_NorthWales said:

RochdalePioneers said:

An election remains unlikely. But these are unlikely times. I don't see a deal that will be acceptable by both Tory MPs and the EU - one or the other will come up with something "new" but won't actually have listened (again) to the red lines of the other side.

So we get to an impasse. Government in office but not in power. Unable to do a deal, unable NOT to do a deal (even in its most defiant rhetoric, the government know that no deal is the end of them). So we need to reframe and go bigger. A General Election or a Referendum on No Deal.

In ordinary times these options absolutely would not happen. But these are desperate times...

Tell me how a GE changes anything unless Corbyn puts a second referendum in his manifesto and that was categorically ruled out last night.

The only thing that could change matters is a second referendum but at present the path to that is unclear, However, it must now have a chance one way or the other

People are talking about a 3rd referendum being the nuclear option but it isn't - the fractured parties remain fractured and we debate two very clear options.

An election - called solely because the government has ceased to function and cannot get any Brexit measure through the Commons - really is the nuclear option. What would be the position of the parties on Brexit that they would be asking for a mandate to deliver? Would the Tories pledge to try and force through a Chequers deal already rejected by the EU? Would Labour pledge to try and force through a Norway + CU deal? Would anyone care what the LibDems pledge? Would Farage once again become leader of UKIP?

An election in the next few months - in the winter, with the chaos detailed above - should not be the plan. Is not the plan. But may be the least worst option if no deal is possible with the current make up of the Commons.

Big_G_NorthWales

TOPPING said:

archer101au said:

TOPPING said:

archer101au said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Yesterday the DUP rejected the Canada deal and overnight reports from the US have confirmed that Trump is refusing to appoint judges to the WTO and that he wants root and branch change to it.

It is in crisis as the arbitration system collapses due to lack of judges.

A double blow to ERG

The DUP certainly did not say that Canada was dborder solution re CETA. Translation - they will want to be paid off.

Do remember that the DUP have rejected outright the Chequers plan because it involves an NI backstop and they have always been opposed to Norway. The only plan they ever supported was an FTA, mainly of course because they want regulations to diverge with ROI because it makes it harder to get a united Ireland later.

You are over-reading this.

And the question then becomes does their desire as you say to cement differences in (regulatory, customs, whatever) regime overcome just about everyone else's desire for a deal. Without the DUP there would be a border in the Irish Sea in a heartbeat, called something else, obvs as a border would be illegal. It really is a who governs Britain moment and we know what happened the last time round.

So on topic, would the DUP threat to derail any deal and crash out be sufficient for May to call an election for a mandate for whatever deal she had agreed (this time) with the EU?

Conservatives will never support a border in the Irish Sea and neither will most people in the UK. There is no good reason for it to happen so you are basically asking people to vote for the humiliation of the UK. If she called an election on that basis she would lose.

It is not the DUP's fault we are in this mess - that lies with Theresa May who went down the backstop road so she could get her good headlines in December without apparently having any idea that the DUP would reject it or that it would be impossible to deliver.

You're over-dramatising. There are plenty of regulatory divergences today between the mainland and the six counties *cough* abortion *cough* and that doesn't have Jacob marching on Parliament, now, does it? Does anyone call it a break up of the UK? Do people believe that this, arguably fundamental, divergence between regulatory environments constitutes a "border"?

No of course not; no one would care or notice if there is a different widget regulatory authorisation system in NI vs GB.

The problem is that TM and the DUP have ruled out an Irish sea border

Philip_Thompson

TOPPING said:

You're over-dramatising. There are plenty of regulatory divergences today between the mainland and the six counties *cough* abortion *cough* and that doesn't have Jacob marching on Parliament, now, does it? Does anyone call it a break up of the UK? Do people believe that this, arguably fundamental, divergence between regulatory environments constitutes a "border"?

No of course not; no one would care or notice if there is a different widget regulatory authorisation system in NI vs GB.

But the point is that the differences between the six counties and GB are because the six counties have chosen to diverge not because they've had divergence forced upon them by the Republic.

Otherwise abortion would be a terrible example since the Republic is legalising abortion if NI were forced to be in lockstep with the Republic (which is what the fuss over the backstop is all about) then NI would be getting forced into a change now.

Philip_Thompson

Big_G_NorthWales said:

TOPPING said:

archer101au said:

TOPPING said:

archer101au said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Yesterday the DUP rejected the Canada deal and overnight reports from the US have confirmed that Trump is refusing to appoint judges to the WTO and that he wants root and branch change to it.

It is in crisis as the arbitration system collapses due to lack of judges.

A double blow to ERG

The DUP certainly did not say that Canada was dborder solution re CETA. Translation - they will want to be paid off.

Do remember that the DUP have rejected outright the Chequers plan because it involves an NI backstop and they have always been opposed to Norway. The only plan they ever supported was an FTA, mainly of course because they want regulations to diverge with ROI because it makes it harder to get a united Ireland later.

You are over-reading this.

And the question then becomes does their desire as you say to cement differences in (regulatory, customs, whatever) regime overcome just about everyone else's desire for a deal. Without the DUP there would be a border in the Irish Sea in a heartbeat, called something else, obvs as a border would be illegal. It really is a who governs Britain moment and we know what happened the last time round.

So on topic, would the DUP threat to derail any deal and crash out be sufficient for May to call an election for a mandate for whatever deal she had agreed (this time) with the EU?

Conservatives will never support a border in the Irish Sea and neither will most people in the UK. There is no good reason for it to happen so you are basically asking people to vote for the humiliation of the UK. If she called an election on that basis she would lose.

It is not the DUP's fault we are in this mess - that lies with Theresa May who went down the backstop road so she could get her good headlines in December without apparently having any idea that the DUP would reject it or that it would be impossible to deliver.

You're over-dramatising. There are plenty of regulatory divergences today between the mainland and the six counties *cough* abortion *cough* and that doesn't have Jacob marching on Parliament, now, does it? Does anyone call it a break up of the UK? Do people believe that this, arguably fundamental, divergence between regulatory environments constitutes a "border"?

No of course not; no one would care or notice if there is a different widget regulatory authorisation system in NI vs GB.

The problem is that TM and the DUP have ruled out an Irish sea border

That's not a problem. Why don't the EU agree to an English channel sea border and have the Republic on our side of the border?

Big_G_NorthWales

RochdalePioneers said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

RochdalePioneers said:

An election remains unlikely. But these are unlikely times. I don't see a deal that will be acceptable by both Tory MPs and the EU - one or the other will come up with something "new" but won't actually have listened (again) to the red lines of the other side.

So we get to an impasse. Government in office but not in power. Unable to do a deal, unable NOT to do a deal (even in its most defiant rhetoric, the government know that no deal is the end of them). So we need to reframe and go bigger. A General Election or a Referendum on No Deal.

In ordinary times these options absolutely would not happen. But these are desperate times...

Tell me how a GE changes anything unless Corbyn puts a second referendum in his manifesto and that was categorically ruled out last night.

The only thing that could change matters is a second referendum but at present the path to that is unclear, However, it must now have a chance one way or the other

People are talking about a 3rd referendum being the nuclear option but it isn't - the fractured parties remain fractured and we debate two very clear options.

An election - called solely because the government has ceased to function and cannot get any Brexit measure through the Commons - really is the nuclear option. What would be the position of the parties on Brexit that they would be asking for a mandate to deliver? Would the Tories pledge to try and force through a Chequers deal already rejected by the EU? Would Labour pledge to try and force through a Norway + CU deal? Would anyone care what the LibDems pledge? Would Farage once again become leader of UKIP?

An election in the next few months - in the winter, with the chaos detailed above - should not be the plan. Is not the plan. But may be the least worst option if no deal is possible with the current make up of the Commons.

The last election by TM was based on Brexit and that was lost on domestic issues. I do not see how a GE is contained only to Brexit

The only way is to specifically ask the electorate about Brexit is a second referendum. How we get there goodness only knows

Big_G_NorthWales

Philip_Thompson said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Do you know, I do not think I am.

TM has the backing of her cabinet and the DUP rejects ERG proposals.

The WTO are in disarray following Trump's idiotic interventions.

Labour are indicating they could back a deal that prevents no deal

The mood music is shifting but I believe TM deal will be accepted by the HOC but if not anything could happen

The ERG account for not more than 50 diehards and that is dwarfed by the other 600

Again the DUP don't reject ERG proposals they reject Chequers.

They rejected it last night as per this forum's references to their statement

No they didn't. The stated their concerns but they didn't reject it.

They will not accept an Irish sea border. How do you resolve that because if you have the answer we have unlocked Brexit

Big_G_NorthWales

Philip_Thompson said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

TOPPING said:

archer101au said:

TOPPING said:

archer101au said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Yesterday the DUP rejected the Canada deal and overnight reports from the US have confirmed that Trump is refusing to appoint judges to the WTO and that he wants root and branch change to it.

It is in crisis as the arbitration system collapses due to lack of judges.

A double blow to ERG

The DUP certainly did not say that Canada was dborder solution re CETA. Translation - they will want to be paid off.

You are over-reading this.

And the question then becomes does their desire as you say to cement differences in (regulatory, customs, whatever) regime overcome just about everyone else's desire for a deal. Without the DUP there would be a border in the Irish Sea in a heartbeat, called something else, obvs as a border would be illegal. It really is a who governs Britain moment and we know what happened the last time round.

So on topic, would the DUP threat to derail any deal and crash out be sufficient for May to call an election for a mandate for whatever deal she had agreed (this time) with the EU?

Conservatives will never support a border in the Irish Sea and neither will most people in the UK. There is no good reason for it to happen so you are basically asking people to vote for the humiliation of the UK. If she called an election on that basis she would lose.

It is not the DUP's fault we are in this mess - that lies with Theresa May who went down the backstop road so she could get her good headlines in December without apparently having any idea that the DUP would reject it or that it would be impossible to deliver.

You're over-dramatising. There are plenty of regulatory divergences today between the mainland and the six counties *cough* abortion *cough* and that doesn't have Jacob marching on Parliament, now, does it? Does anyone call it a break up of the UK? Do people believe that this, arguably fundamental, divergence between regulatory environments constitutes a "border"?

No of course not; no one would care or notice if there is a different widget regulatory authorisation system in NI vs GB.

The problem is that TM and the DUP have ruled out an Irish sea border

That's not a problem. Why don't the EU agree to an English channel sea border and have the Republic on our side of the border?

Pardon - is that your answer - really

TOPPING

Philip_Thompson said:

TOPPING said:

You're over-dramatising. There are plenty of regulatory divergences today between the mainland and the six counties *cough* abortion *cough* and that doesn't have Jacob marching on Parliament, now, does it? Does anyone call it a break up of the UK? Do people believe that this, arguably fundamental, divergence between regulatory environments constitutes a "border"?

No of course not; no one would care or notice if there is a different widget regulatory authorisation system in NI vs GB.

But the point is that the differences between the six counties and GB are because the six counties have chosen to diverge not because they've had divergence forced upon them by the Republic.

Otherwise abortion would be a terrible example since the Republic is legalising abortion if NI were forced to be in lockstep with the Republic (which is what the fuss over the backstop is all about) then NI would be getting forced into a change now.

I think that nuance will be lost on most people. Border in the Irish Sea? Catastrophic to our great nation. Application of Widget Regulation EU/2018/7385/RoI75/B in NI but not GB? Not so incendiary.

But as I have said, I think it is no more than a 20-30% chance.

Far more likely is that the UK as a whole stays in the SM.

archer101au

TOPPING said:

archer101au said:

TOPPING said:

And the question then becomes does their desire as you say to cement differences in (regulatory, customs, whatever) regime overcome just about everyone else's desire for a deal. Without the DUP there would be a border in the Irish Sea in a heartbeat, called something else, obvs as a border would be illegal. It really is a who governs Britain moment and we know what happened the last time round.

So on topic, would the DUP threat to derail any deal and crash out be sufficient for May to call an election for a mandate for whatever deal she had agreed (this time) with the EU?

Conservatives will never support a border in the Irish Sea and neither will most people in the UK. There is no good reason for it to happen so you are basically asking people to vote for the humiliation of the UK. If she called an election on that basis she would lose.

It is not the DUP's fault we are in this mess - that lies with Theresa May who went down the backstop road so she could get her good headlines in December without apparently having any idea that the DUP would reject it or that it would be impossible to deliver.

You're over-dramatising. There are plenty of regulatory divergences today between the mainland and the six counties *cough* abortion *cough* and that doesn't have Jacob marching on Parliament, now, does it? Does anyone call it a break up of the UK? Do people believe that this, arguably fundamental, divergence between regulatory environments constitutes a "border"?

No of course not; no one would care or notice if there is a different widget regulatory authorisation system in NI vs GB.

You need to be clear what you are proposing. Even under Barnier's de-dramatisation, all goods moving between GB and NI would need a customs declaration, pay tariffs (if the UK and EU do not have a full FTA and even if they do, there may be issues with rules of origin) and goods that are circulating in GB that do not follow EU standards cannot enter NI. If GB diverges from EU regulations for internal trade (eg 80% plus, one of the benefits of Brexit) all of a sudden these goods cannot move around the UK. Yes, there will be a huge problem if UK widgets cannot enter NI.

This is an absurd situation and will never happen. The solution to NI is, and always has been, a soft border between NI and ROI based on maxfac.

archer101au

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

TOPPING said:

archer101au said:

TOPPING said:

archer101au said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Yesterday the DUP rejected the Canada deal and overnight reports from the US have confirmed that Trump is refusing to appoint judges to the WTO and that he wants root and branch change to it.

It is in crisis as the arbitration system collapses due to lack of judges.

A double blow to ERG

The DUP certainly did not say that Canada was dborder solution re CETA. Translation - they will want to be paid off.

You are over-reading this.

And the question then becomes does their desire as you say to cement differences in (regulatory, customs, whatever) regime overcome just about everyone else's desire for a deal. Without the DUP there would be a border in the Irish Sea in a heartbeat, called something else, obvs as a border would be illegal. It really is a who governs Britain moment and we know what happened the last time round.

So on topic, would the DUP threat to derail any deal and crash out be sufficient for May to call an election for a mandate for whatever deal she had agreed (this time) with the EU?

Conservatives will never support a border in the Irish Sea and neither will most people in the UK. There is no good reason for it to happen so you are basically asking people to vote for the humiliation of the UK. If she called an election on that basis she would lose.

It is not the DUP's fault we are in this mess - that lies with Theresa May who went down the backstop road so she could get her good headlines in December without apparently having any idea that the DUP would reject it or that it would be impossible to deliver.

You're over-dramatising. There are plenty of regulatory divergences today between the mainland and the six counties *cough* abortion *cough* and that doesn't have Jacob marching on Parliament, now, does it? Does anyone call it a break up of the UK? Do people believe that this, arguably fundamental, divergence between regulatory environments constitutes a "border"?

No of course not; no one would care or notice if there is a different widget regulatory authorisation system in NI vs GB.

The problem is that TM and the DUP have ruled out an Irish sea border

That's not a problem. Why don't the EU agree to an English channel sea border and have the Republic on our side of the border?

Pardon - is that your answer - really

It is just as sensible, or stupid, as the answer the EU is proposing.

bigjohnowls

Dear John


John, Labour is ready.

We're ready to rebuild Britain for the many, not the few.

We're ready to make vital changes for millions of parents and children – providing free universal high-quality childcare. We're ready to give peace of mind and dignity to the older generation – protecting pensions, winter-fuel allowances and bus passes. We're ready to deliver a Green Industrial Revolution that will create jobs, tackle climate change and provide sustainable energy for the future.

We're ready because of people like you, John

As I said today, not a penny of our funds comes from dodgy donors or shady businessmen's clubs, it comes from hundreds of thousands of people like you.

Today we met in Liverpool as a Party ready to lead. Next year let us meet as a Labour government. A government finally investing in Britain after years of dereliction, bringing our society together after a decade of division.

A strong society is one that gives all our young people the chance to realise their potential and in which all of us know if our parents need care they will get it.

Our task is to build that Britain and together we can ...............

Jeremy

Nigel_Foremain

archer101au said:

TOPPING said:

archer101au said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Yesterday the DUP rejected the Canada deal and overnight reports from the US have confirmed that Trump is refusing to appoint judges to the WTO and that he wants root and branch change to it.

It is in crisis as the arbitration system collapses due to lack of judges.

A double blow to ERG

The DUP certainly did not say that Canada was dead. What they said was that the paper released on Monday contained too many grey areas in relation to NI regulations for them to support it as written. The fundamental basis of the paper - an FTA with a soft border in NI at the land border is fully supported by the DUP. This was not an official DUP statement (unlike those which reject the backstop), it was the DUP just reminding everyone that they will need to be brought along on the border solution re CETA. Translation - they will want to be paid off.

Do remember that the DUP have rejected outright the Chequers plan because it involves an NI backstop and they have always been opposed to Norway. The only plan they ever supported was an FTA, mainly of course because they want regulations to diverge with ROI because it makes it harder to get a united Ireland later.

You are over-reading this.

And the question then becomes does their desire as you say to cement differences in (regulatory, customs, whatever) regime overcome just about everyone else's desire for a deal. Without the DUP there would be a border in the Irish Sea in a heartbeat, called something else, obvs as a border would be illegal. It really is a who governs Britain moment and we know what happened the last time round.

So on topic, would the DUP threat to derail any deal and crash out be sufficient for May to call an election for a mandate for whatever deal she had agreed (this time) with the EU?

Conservatives will never support a border in the Irish Sea and neither will most people in the UK. There is no good reason for it to happen so you are basically asking people to vote for the humiliation of the UK. If she called an election on that basis she would lose.

It is not the DUP's fault we are in this mess - that lies with Theresa May who went down the backstop road so she could get her good headlines in December without apparently having any idea that the DUP would reject it or that it would be impossible to deliver.

We are already humiliated. That humiliation came from the car-crash-called-Brexit. We are a laughing stock and it is thanks to people like you who pretend you are "patriots"

Big_G_NorthWales

archer101au said:

TOPPING said:

archer101au said:

TOPPING said:

And the question then becomes does their desire as you say to cement differences in (regulatory, customs, whatever) regime overcome just about everyone else's desire for a deal. Without the DUP there would be a border in the Irish Sea in a heartbeat, called something else, obvs as a border would be illegal. It really is a who governs Britain moment and we know what happened the last time round.

So on topic, would the DUP threat to derail any deal and crash out be sufficient for May to call an election for a mandate for whatever deal she had agreed (this time) with the EU?

Conservatives will never support a border in the Irish Sea and neither will most people in the UK. There is no good reason for it to happen so you are basically asking people to vote for the humiliation of the UK. If she called an election on that basis she would lose.

It is not the DUP's fault we are in this mess - that lies with Theresa May who went down the backstop road so she could get her good headlines in December without apparently having any idea that the DUP would reject it or that it would be impossible to deliver.

You're over-dramatising. There are plenty of regulatory divergences today between the mainland and the six counties *cough* abortion *cough* and that doesn't have Jacob marching on Parliament, now, does it? Does anyone call it a break up of the UK? Do people believe that this, arguably fundamental, divergence between regulatory environments constitutes a "border"?

No of course not; no one would care or notice if there is a different widget regulatory authorisation system in NI vs GB.

You need to be clear what you are proposing. Even under Barnier's de-dramatisation, all goods moving between GB and NI would need a customs declaration, pay tariffs (if the UK and EU do not have a full FTA and even if they do, there may be issues with rules of origin) and goods that are circulating in GB that do not follow EU standards cannot enter NI. If GB diverges from EU regulations for internal trade (eg 80% plus, one of the benefits of Brexit) all of a sudden these goods cannot move around the UK. Yes, there will be a huge problem if UK widgets cannot enter NI.

This is an absurd situation and will never happen. The solution to NI is, and always has been, a soft border between NI and ROI based on maxfac.

I agree with your last sentence but the EU want to punish us

Big_G_NorthWales

bigjohnowls said:

Dear John


John, Labour is ready.

We're ready to rebuild Britain for the many, not the few.

We're ready to make vital changes for millions of parents and children – providing free universal high-quality childcare. We're ready to give peace of mind and dignity to the older generation – protecting pensions, winter-fuel allowances and bus passes. We're ready to deliver a Green Industrial Revolution that will create jobs, tackle climate change and provide sustainable energy for the future.

We're ready because of people like you, John

As I said today, not a penny of our funds comes from dodgy donors or shady businessmen's clubs, it comes from hundreds of thousands of people like you.

Today we met in Liverpool as a Party ready to lead. Next year let us meet as a Labour government. A government finally investing in Britain after years of dereliction, bringing our society together after a decade of division.

A strong society is one that gives all our young people the chance to realise their potential and in which all of us know if our parents need care they will get it.

Our task is to build that Britain and together we can ...............

Jeremy

Santa Claus

RochdalePioneers

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Philip_Thompson said:

That's not a problem. Why don't the EU agree to an English channel sea border and have the Republic on our side of the border?

Pardon - is that your answer - really

I have heard similar arguments. Silly non-solutions is what happens when the ask is undeliverable against other commitments.

There are solutions available to fix this problem - which the government have ruled out. They will fall with no deal. They will fall agreeing EEA+CU. They will fall begging for an extension and "can we stay please". But those are the options, all unpalatable if you are a Tory because all of them see the fall of the government. Hence the various batshit options around a virtual border patrolled by drones, imposing Brexit on ROI, dividing NI from GB etc etc.

Which brings me back to why there will have to be either an election or a referendum. Because however impossible these are, if the alternative is the fall of the government then the government may find the unpalatable better than the undeliverable...

Big_G_NorthWales

Nigel_Foremain said:

archer101au said:

TOPPING said:

archer101au said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Yesterday the DUP rejected the Canada deal and overnight reports from the US have confirmed that Trump is refusing to appoint judges to the WTO and that he wants root and branch change to it.

It is in crisis as the arbitration system collapses due to lack of judges.

A double blow to ERG

The DUP certainly did not say that Canada was dead. What they said was that the paper released on Monday contained too many grey areas in relation to NI regulations for them to support it as written. The fundamental basis of the paper - an FTA with a soft border in NI at the land border is fully supported by the DUP. This was not an official DUP statement (unlike those which reject the backstop), it was the DUP just reminding everyone that they will need to be brought along on the border solution re CETA. Translation - they will want to be paid off.

Do remember that the DUP have rejected outright the Chequers plan because it involves an NI backstop and they have always been opposed to Norway. The only plan they ever supported was an FTA, mainly of course because they want regulations to diverge with ROI because it makes it harder to get a united Ireland later.

You are over-reading this.

And the question then becomes does their desire as you say to cement differences in (regulatory, customs, whatever) regime overcome just about everyone else's desire for a deal. Without the DUP there would be a border in the Irish Sea in a heartbeat, called something else, obvs as a border would be illegal. It really is a who governs Britain moment and we know what happened the last time round.

So on topic, would the DUP threat to derail any deal and crash out be sufficient for May to call an election for a mandate for whatever deal she had agreed (this time) with the EU?

Conservatives will never support a border in the Irish Sea and neither will most people in the UK. There is no good reason for it to happen so you are basically asking people to vote for the humiliation of the UK. If she called an election on that basis she would lose.

It is not the DUP's fault we are in this mess - that lies with Theresa May who went down the backstop road so she could get her good headlines in December without apparently having any idea that the DUP would reject it or that it would be impossible to deliver.

We are already humiliated. That humiliation came from the car-crash-called-Brexit. We are a laughing stock and it is thanks to people like you who pretend you are "patriots"

It is silly to blame over 17 million who voted out for a car crash. They were a democratic majority

RochdalePioneers

Big_G_NorthWales said:

I agree with your last sentence but the EU want to punish us

They really don't. Their position on their red lines was clear before the referendum and they aren't moving on them. Its only "humiliation" because the UK arrogantly assumed they would roll over and built its entire strategy on that assumption.

bigjohnowls

Big_G_NorthWales said:

bigjohnowls said:

Dear John


John, Labour is ready.

We're ready to rebuild Britain for the many, not the few.

We're ready to make vital changes for millions of parents and children – providing free universal high-quality childcare. We're ready to give peace of mind and dignity to the older generation – protecting pensions, winter-fuel allowances and bus passes. We're ready to deliver a Green Industrial Revolution that will create jobs, tackle climate change and provide sustainable energy for the future.

We're ready because of people like you, John

As I said today, not a penny of our funds comes from dodgy donors or shady businessmen's clubs, it comes from hundreds of thousands of people like you.

Today we met in Liverpool as a Party ready to lead. Next year let us meet as a Labour government. A government finally investing in Britain after years of dereliction, bringing our society together after a decade of division.

A strong society is one that gives all our young people the chance to realise their potential and in which all of us know if our parents need care they will get it.

Our task is to build that Britain and together we can ...............

Jeremy

Santa Claus

I have been a good boy apart from in 2016 vote

philiph

Cyclefree said:

Sandpit said:

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/FraserNelson/status/1045244576032854016

Back all the women. It’s already been said informally that it’s the most important of the selection criteria.

Why? The best person surely. Or am I being stupidly old-fashioned?

Kirsty Wark has left Desert Island Discs because of illness so not sure that she’s up to it. Can’t stand Emily Maitlis - she cannot ask a succint pointed question to save her life.

Isn't the best person the one who is the best Chair of a discussion, the facilitator rather than the question asker?

Why they are looking at political interviewers baffles me.

anothernick

It is silly to blame over 17 million who voted out for a car crash. They were a democratic majority

There were sold a pup. They voted for something that does not exist and cannot be created, namely a simple, cost free exit from the EU. It's about time our so called leaders had the courage to do some leading and explain this to people.

Theuniondivvie

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Borough, at least one Labour MP wants to party like it's 1926.

"Give us what we want or we'll try and make the whole country go on strike."

Pretty sure that at least one Tory MP would also like to party like it's 1926, and is fantasising about a British Gazette redux & flying columns of strike breakers.

rpjs

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

archer101au said:

TOPPING said:

archer101au said:

The DUP certainly did not say that Canada was dead. What they said was that the paper released on Monday contained too many grey areas in relation to NI regulations for them to support it as written. The fundamental basis of the paper - an FTA with a soft border in NI at the land border is fully supported by the DUP. This was not an official DUP statement (unlike those which reject the backstop), it was the DUP just reminding everyone that they will need to be brought along on the border solution re CETA. Translation - they will want to be paid off.

Do remember that the DUP have rejected outright the Chequers plan because it involves an NI backstop and they have always been opposed to Norway. The only plan they ever supported was an FTA, mainly of course because they want regulations to diverge with ROI because it makes it harder to get a united Ireland later.

You are over-reading this.

And the question then becomes does their desire as you say to cement differences in (regulatory, customs, whatever) regime overcome just about everyone else's desire for a deal. Without the DUP there would be a border in the Irish Sea in a heartbeat, called something else, obvs as a border would be illegal. It really is a who governs Britain moment and we know what happened the last time round.

So on topic, would the DUP threat to derail any deal and crash out be sufficient for May to call an election for a mandate for whatever deal she had agreed (this time) with the EU?

Conservatives will never support a border in the Irish Sea and neither will most people in the UK. There is no good reason for it to happen so you are basically asking people to vote for the humiliation of the UK. If she called an election on that basis she would lose.

It is not the DUP's fault we are in this mess - that lies with Theresa May who went down the backstop road so she could get her good headlines in December without apparently having any idea that the DUP would reject it or that it would be impossible to deliver.

We are already humiliated. That humiliation came from the car-crash-called-Brexit. We are a laughing stock and it is thanks to people like you who pretend you are "patriots"

It is silly to blame over 17 million who voted out for a car crash. They were a democratic majority

They still voted for a car crash though. Tories always complain when Labour gets in that the electorate has voted for “free owls” or “the magic money tree”. The right is always saying just because people vote for something they don’t like it doesn’t mean the people can have it because it’s “uneconomic”. Well, the same applies to Brexit.

rottenborough

philiph said:

Cyclefree said:

Sandpit said:

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/FraserNelson/status/1045244576032854016

Back all the women. It’s already been said informally that it’s the most important of the selection criteria.

Why? The best person surely. Or am I being stupidly old-fashioned?

Kirsty Wark has left Desert Island Discs because of illness so not sure that she’s up to it. Can’t stand Emily Maitlis - she cannot ask a succint pointed question to save her life.

Isn't the best person the one who is the best Chair of a discussion, the facilitator rather than the question asker?

Why they are looking at political interviewers baffles me.

It is Kirsty Young who has an illness, not Wark.

Theuniondivvie

Cyclefree said:

Sandpit said:

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/FraserNelson/status/1045244576032854016

Back all the women. It’s already been said informally that it’s the most important of the selection criteria.

Why? The best person surely. Or am I being stupidly old-fashioned?

Kirsty Wark* has left Desert Island Discs because of illness so not sure that she’s up to it. Can’t stand Emily Maitlis - she cannot ask a succint pointed question to save her life.

*the slightly more mellifluously toned Kirsty Young, who definitely isn't in the running.

Philip_Thompson

philiph said:

Cyclefree said:

Sandpit said:

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/FraserNelson/status/1045244576032854016

Back all the women. It’s already been said informally that it’s the most important of the selection criteria.

Why? The best person surely. Or am I being stupidly old-fashioned?

Kirsty Wark has left Desert Island Discs because of illness so not sure that she’s up to it. Can’t stand Emily Maitlis - she cannot ask a succint pointed question to save her life.

Isn't the best person the one who is the best Chair of a discussion, the facilitator rather than the question asker?

Why they are looking at political interviewers baffles me.

Indeed!

I'm not sure her name and don't know if she still does it as haven't watched it for a while (or since it changed name) but the woman who co-hosted Daily Politics with Andrew Neil was very good at that. Facilitated the discussions well, could ask some interesting questions but overall continued the discussions going well without dominating like Neil (whom I greatly respect) would.

I think Andrew Neil is the BBC's best interviewer but he'd be wasted on Question Time. He should better replace Marr as hosting interviews than moderating discussions.

Philip_Thompson

anothernick said:

It is silly to blame over 17 million who voted out for a car crash. They were a democratic majority

There were sold a pup. They voted for something that does not exist and cannot be created, namely a simple, cost free exit from the EU. It's about time our so called leaders had the courage to do some leading and explain this to people.

We voted for us to be in control of our own laws and their own nation as approximately 170 countries globally are. That absolutely can be created.

We were fully warned by your side that there would be costs but made the decision to be in control anyway. You don't get to repeat "ah but there's costs" now when that was explicitly made clear by the government of the day and everyone your side of the debate at the time.

FrancisUrquhart

A ground crew member said the man "just ran from the building towards the plane," which was departing for Amsterdam.

An eye witness told Irish state broadcaster RTÉ that the man was "quite determined" to make his flight, adding that he ran towards the plane "with his suitcase under his arm".

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-45663321

AlastairMeeks

Meanwhile, this gap is starting to get meaningful:

https://twitter.com/EuropeElects/status/1045262705966436352

Big_G_NorthWales

Amber Rudd has said there are 40 conservative mps who would vote down Canada, about the same number as ERG who want it

And just adds to the mood music, Canada is dead

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Thompson, Jenny Scott? She was excellent, very sharp indeed. Could be wrong, but she might be the only woman on the MPC right now.

Sean_F

http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/ir1tkur96o/Peston_180926_ElectionsandBrexit_W.pdf

Labour's policies on nationalisation are popular; but the top line figures still show a Conservative lead. It's similar to the problem the Conservatives had under Blair.

The poll also shows a big majority against a second referendum.

Big_G_NorthWales

AlastairMeeks said:

Meanwhile, this gap is starting to get meaningful:

https://twitter.com/EuropeElects/status/1045262705966436352

Looks that way

Sean_F

Philip_Thompson said:

anothernick said:

It is silly to blame over 17 million who voted out for a car crash. They were a democratic majority

There were sold a pup. They voted for something that does not exist and cannot be created, namely a simple, cost free exit from the EU. It's about time our so called leaders had the courage to do some leading and explain this to people.

We voted for us to be in control of our own laws and their own nation as approximately 170 countries globally are. That absolutely can be created.

We were fully warned by your side that there would be costs but made the decision to be in control anyway. You don't get to repeat "ah but there's costs" now when that was explicitly made clear by the government of the day and everyone your side of the debate at the time.

Obviously, there are going to be costs. There were costs when we joined the EU, so there are bound to be costs when we leave it.

tlg86

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Thompson, Jenny Scott? She was excellent, very sharp indeed. Could be wrong, but she might be the only woman on the MPC right now.

She's not on the MPC, she's an adviser having previously been communications director.

williamglenn

AlastairMeeks said:

Meanwhile, this gap is starting to get meaningful:

And that is before the leading Brexiteers have thrown in the towel. A landslide for Remain is on the cards in a second referendum.

Andy_Cooke

I may be being slow, but I struggle to see how there could be a Canada-style deal in existence prior to Brexit day to be voted down, up, along, or over.
Unless we propose to simply photocopy the 1,634 pages of the deal (painstakingly and carefully optimised for the Canada-EU specific comparable strengths and weaknesses through many years of compromise and discussions), we'd have to accept several years (a decade +?) of a transition period where we literally do simply Brexit in name only, but without any say at all. Not just the 20-30% of the EU acquis applicable to EEA countries, not with the institutions and shaping capability of the EEA structure - literally all the acquis with no influence.
And where would the incentive be for the EU to complete negotiations, ratification, and application in any sensible timescale? By 2025, or 2030, or whenever the deal is finally ratified, God only knows what circumstances will be here.

Big_G_NorthWales

Sean_F said:

http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/ir1tkur96o/Peston_180926_ElectionsandBrexit_W.pdf

Labour's policies on nationalisation are popular; but the top line figures still show a Conservative lead. It's similar to the problem the Conservatives had under Blair.

The poll also shows a big majority against a second referendum.

The key question is do you trust Corbyn/ McDonnell not so much the policies

Morris_Dancer

Mr. 86, ah, I stand corrected.

I was right about her being very sharp, though.

RochdalePioneers

Sean_F said:

The poll also shows a big majority against a second referendum.

Nobody wants a second referendum. Even some of the Labour people agitating for it don't actually want it. What they really want is NOT to crash out with no deal. And they're willing to look at literally anything to prevent it from happening.

The problem we have is that a phalanx of senior Conservatives are determined to bring about crash Brexit and reshape the UK economy so that they/their friends can profit from the debacle. That crash Brexit poses no risk and all the collected experts / industry leaders are lying is their mantra and is one happily peddled by allied newspapers.

Which is how we get to voters who face personal severe difficulties from crash Brexit angrily insisting is HAS to happen because they believe that black is white. One of two things happens - we crash out, their world implodes and we get massive social unrest, or we don't crash out, they get angrier and find that a hard nationalist party takes up its place as the 3rd party of British politics.

rpjs

Sean_F said:

Obviously, there are going to be costs. There were costs when we joined the EU, so there are bound to be costs when we leave it.

The question now is not whether or not their will be costs of leaving the EU, but whether the UK can afford those costs. It is increasingly clear that the answer is “no”.

williamglenn

Sean_F said:

http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/ir1tkur96o/Peston_180926_ElectionsandBrexit_W.pdf

Labour's policies on nationalisation are popular; but the top line figures still show a Conservative lead. It's similar to the problem the Conservatives had under Blair.

The poll also shows a big majority against a second referendum.

Plurality, and it's only Tory voters who are opposed. It's interesting that people are more supportive of a referendum between the deal and Remain.

Richard_Nabavi

RochdalePioneers said:

... snip...

The problem we have is that a phalanx of senior Conservatives are determined to bring about crash Brexit and reshape the UK economy so that they/their friends can profit from the debacle.
... snip...

Bonkers. Just plain bonkers. Look at what you've just written.

Beverley_C

Richard_Nabavi said:

RochdalePioneers said:

... snip...

The problem we have is that a phalanx of senior Conservatives are determined to bring about crash Brexit and reshape the UK economy so that they/their friends can profit from the debacle.
... snip...

Bonkers. Just plain bonkers. Look at what you've just written.

I could believe it. Brexit makes so little sense that an interpretation like that is actually believable.

tlg86

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. 86, ah, I stand corrected.

I was right about her being very sharp, though.

I think I've told this story on here before, but I walked behind her when she was doing a piece to camera at the launch of the Lib Dem campaign at the 2005 GE. I hoped to see myself on the Six O'Clock News but alas that bit didn't get used.

Richard_Nabavi

Beverley_C said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

RochdalePioneers said:

... snip...

The problem we have is that a phalanx of senior Conservatives are determined to bring about crash Brexit and reshape the UK economy so that they/their friends can profit from the debacle.
... snip...

Bonkers. Just plain bonkers. Look at what you've just written.

I could believe it. Brexit makes so little sense that an interpretation like that is actually believable.

No, it really isn't.

williamglenn

Richard_Nabavi said:

RochdalePioneers said:

... snip...

The problem we have is that a phalanx of senior Conservatives are determined to bring about crash Brexit and reshape the UK economy so that they/their friends can profit from the debacle.
... snip...

Bonkers. Just plain bonkers. Look at what you've just written.

Mr Pioneers has trouble understanding that the people to whom he refers sincerely believe that crashing out with no deal will have no effect on the UK economy at all. They are the ones who are bonkers.

Richard_Nabavi

williamglenn said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

RochdalePioneers said:

... snip...

The problem we have is that a phalanx of senior Conservatives are determined to bring about crash Brexit and reshape the UK economy so that they/their friends can profit from the debacle.
... snip...

Bonkers. Just plain bonkers. Look at what you've just written.

Mr Pioneers has trouble understanding that the people to whom he refers sincerely believe that crashing out with no deal will have no effect on the UK economy at all. They are the ones who are bonkers.

They too, certainly.

tpfkar

Sean_F said:

We voted for us to be in control of our own laws and their own nation as approximately 170 countries globally are. That absolutely can be created.

We were fully warned by your side that there would be costs but made the decision to be in control anyway. You don't get to repeat "ah but there's costs" now when that was explicitly made clear by the government of the day and everyone your side of the debate at the time.

Obviously, there are going to be costs. There were costs when we joined the EU, so there are bound to be costs when we leave it.

£350million. A week. Straight to the NHS. A week.

tpfkar

Triplicate sorry

tpfkar

Duplicate sorry

Sean_F

williamglenn said:

Sean_F said:

http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/ir1tkur96o/Peston_180926_ElectionsandBrexit_W.pdf

Labour's policies on nationalisation are popular; but the top line figures still show a Conservative lead. It's similar to the problem the Conservatives had under Blair.

The poll also shows a big majority against a second referendum.

Plurality, and it's only Tory voters who are opposed. It's interesting that people are more supportive of a referendum between the deal and Remain.

Still a big plurality, and there are lots of Conservative voters.

Sean_F

RochdalePioneers said:

Sean_F said:

The poll also shows a big majority against a second referendum.

Nobody wants a second referendum. Even some of the Labour people agitating for it don't actually want it. What they really want is NOT to crash out with no deal. And they're willing to look at literally anything to prevent it from happening.

The problem we have is that a phalanx of senior Conservatives are determined to bring about crash Brexit and reshape the UK economy so that they/their friends can profit from the debacle. That crash Brexit poses no risk and all the collected experts / industry leaders are lying is their mantra and is one happily peddled by allied newspapers.

Which is how we get to voters who face personal severe difficulties from crash Brexit angrily insisting is HAS to happen because they believe that black is white. One of two things happens - we crash out, their world implodes and we get massive social unrest, or we don't crash out, they get angrier and find that a hard nationalist party takes up its place as the 3rd party of British politics.

There may be some Conservatives who think that way, but not many, IMHO.

Big_G_NorthWales

tpfkar said:

Triplicate sorry

I know the feeling

Sean_F

tpfkar said:

Sean_F said:

We voted for us to be in control of our own laws and their own nation as approximately 170 countries globally are. That absolutely can be created.

We were fully warned by your side that there would be costs but made the decision to be in control anyway. You don't get to repeat "ah but there's costs" now when that was explicitly made clear by the government of the day and everyone your side of the debate at the time.

Obviously, there are going to be costs. There were costs when we joined the EU, so there are bound to be costs when we leave it.

£350million. A week. Straight to the NHS. A week.

A promise which is easy to keep. Not that I attribute the improvement in public finances to the referendum vote.

Beverley_C

Richard_Nabavi said:

Beverley_C said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

RochdalePioneers said:

... snip...

The problem we have is that a phalanx of senior Conservatives are determined to bring about crash Brexit and reshape the UK economy so that they/their friends can profit from the debacle.
... snip...

Bonkers. Just plain bonkers. Look at what you've just written.

I could believe it. Brexit makes so little sense that an interpretation like that is actually believable.

No, it really isn't.

Nothing about Brexit surprises me any more.

I quite fancy the idea of a crash-out, no-deal Brexit - just to see how the ERG et al justify the shambles. It may be the only way to burn out the ultra-nationalist infection in the Tory party.

anothernick

RochdalePioneers said:

Nobody wants a second referendum. Even some of the Labour people agitating for it don't actually want it. What they really want is NOT to crash out with no deal. And they're willing to look at literally anything to prevent it from happening.

Exactly. A second referendum is likely to exacerbate divisions, push the U.K. further toward breaking up and lead to a blizzard of dubious and dishonest claims on both sides. Just as the first one did. But, just at the moment, it is hard to see any other way out of the catastrophic political mess in which the Tories have landed us.

HYUFD

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Amber Rudd has said there are 40 conservative mps who would vote down Canada, about the same number as ERG who want it

And just adds to the mood music, Canada is dead

Those 40 Conservative MPs would also vote for a second EU referendum as Rudd confirmed last night if the alternative was No Deal which polling shows Remain would likely win

tpfkar

Away from Labour's conference there have been two nuggets of Brexit news that have really caught my eye:

1) The referral to the ECJ on whether A50 can be revoked by the UK - will really set the cat among the pigeons if so.

2) The poll on preferred outcomes quoted by Guido with a useful pie chart: https://order-order.com/2018/09/25/chequers-remain-crushed-new-poll/
Forget Guido's spin for the moment - I'm struck that there's no option scoring higher than 22% The country is fundamentally splintered on how to proceed, and no shock at all that parliament doesn't look like having a majority for anything. Also makes me wonder how a General Election would help - the parties couldn't cover this range if they tried. Maybe we need a 6 option AV-referendum to help us out?

I also can't help thinking that Labour have done what the Tories wanted them to on Brexit this week. Both looking like they are backsliding so the Tories can paint themselves as the only true champions of Brexit, but also keeping the door open to a way out via a 2nd referendum, if the Tories need an emergency escape.