If May goes then pile on #bridgen4pm at any odds. He's the hero we need but not the hero we deserve.
Geoffrey Cox QC the Attorney General would be better, by far the brightest in the Cabinet and probably the richest as well and a Leaver but not an insane one and a brilliant speaker as he showed at the Tory conference as May's warm up. He would slaughter Corbyn at PMQs
Jeremy Hunt is the richest member of the cabinet by far.
Does he earn £700 000 a year still like Cox? Hunt is getting camper by the day and he blew his chances with his conference 'EU prison' gaffe
Hunt is also quite stare-y.
I don't accept that the 'EU prison' comment blew his chances - it's not like others haven't said worse - but he doesn't come with a helpful political background. Whether justified or not (I don't think it is but that's beside the point), his time as Health Sec is a big negative for him. he remains a possible compromise candidate but I doubt he has enough positive support that transfers would make a difference.
If May goes then pile on #bridgen4pm at any odds. He's the hero we need but not the hero we deserve.
Geoffrey Cox QC the Attorney General would be better, by far the brightest in the Cabinet and probably the richest as well and a Leaver but not an insane one and a brilliant speaker as he showed at the Tory conference as May's warm up. He would slaughter Corbyn at PMQs
Why is his wealth relevant?
It shows he has had a successful career outside politics plus he is very bright and about time we had a fiercely bright PM, we certainly need one at the moment
I don't want to make any over-confident predictions, but I'm about 98% confident that May's statement this afternoon will be her saying, in fluent Russian, that she's a KGB agent whose mission was to undermine the UK by doing the worst possible job of the Brexit negotiations. Tories still won't VONC her in case they end up with Boris.
Well, it would explain a lot, there's no denying that.
If May goes then pile on #bridgen4pm at any odds. He's the hero we need but not the hero we deserve.
Geoffrey Cox QC the Attorney General would be better, by far the brightest in the Cabinet and probably the richest as well and a Leaver but not an insane one and a brilliant speaker as he showed at the Tory conference as May's warm up. He would slaughter Corbyn at PMQs
My personal opinion on why it is such a balls up is that it is because it is being negotiated by people who think leaving is the wrong thing to do.
I think you are probably right, but they were not helped by the red lines which were put in place to appease those who thought that leaving was the right thing to do and that their version of leaving in particular was the one we should (have) pursue(d).
No FoM red line and a lot of problems go away. But of course the British public in polls have said they don't like foreigners, but this is where May should have lead not followed. She manifestly doesn't want to bring immigration down because she didn't do so when she was in charge of it, so she should have backed herself and said that FoM will be mitigated by all kinds of permissible restraints but that it is more important to leave the political structures of the EU which is how she interpreted the vote.
She did none of these things, thus infuriating leavers and remainers alike. Problem is, as the tweet above mentions, she is dealing with international treaties, not the Home Office, where no one cares from one fudge to another, not to say they don't notice them.
Opposing FoM is not the same as disliking foreigners
Though the overlap in that venn diagram is huge.
Thoroughly disagree. Concerns over FOM have always been high, but look at how many votes an overtly racist party gets in UK - 1-2% maximum.
Both Tories and UKIP campaigned on massive reductions in immigration, rather cheekily considering Mrs May completely failed to do so as Home Secretary. We all know that anti-immigration feeling was the big driver of the Leave vote.
Incidentally, it was you who used the term racism, I merely pointed out that those opposing FOM dislike foreigners.
I am unsure how you dislike foreigners for no other reason than them being foreign without being racist. Admittedly that doesn’t t mean you would vote for a racist party like the BNP or, nowadays UKIP.
If May goes then pile on #bridgen4pm at any odds. He's the hero we need but not the hero we deserve.
Geoffrey Cox QC the Attorney General would be better, by far the brightest in the Cabinet and probably the richest as well and a Leaver but not an insane one and a brilliant speaker as he showed at the Tory conference as May's warm up. He would slaughter Corbyn at PMQs
Jeremy Hunt is the richest member of the cabinet by far.
Does he earn £700 000 a year still like Cox? Hunt is getting camper by the day and he blew his chances with his conference 'EU prison' gaffe
1) Cox gave up his barrister work when he became AG, so he's only earning his MP and cabinet salary which is circa £140k a year, just like Hunt.
2) You talked about the richest member of the cabinet not the highest earning member
3) Hunt is worth around £17 million pounds, mostly from the sale of his businesses.
Theresa May's weird rant over immigration at the Tory conference a few years ago coupled with her atrocious performance on this issue while at the Home Office should have provided the necessary warning signs. She thinks a successful Brexit is one where the FoM red line is not breached to the exclusion of everything else. Of course back in 2016 we had all those regular reports of sub Saharans etc flooding into southern Europe with the prospect that if we remained in the EU many of them will find their way into the UK. Time has now moved on.
To the extent I blame Leavers it is in their abject failure to provide a credible Leave contender to defeat May in the leadership election in 2016 leaving us with this dysfunctional situation at the top.
Dunno, ending FoM still seems like the main thing the voters are expecting, doesn't it? I know the Tory MPs who have been pushing for Brexit for all these years are mainly interested in the Libertarian Pirate Island angle, but there's no sign the voters are into that, and the Leave campaign wisely said as little as possible about it in the referendum.
The Libertarian Pirate Island angle is the smallest slither of a side issue.
If there hadn't been mass immigration from 2004 onwards, UKIP wouldn't have won the Euros or got 12% at a GE. FoM is the reason the referendum was called, and the reason Leave won. It is all it is about.
Whose fault is that? Blair for failing to impose transition controls on free movement from the new accession countries in 2004 unlike most EU nations
There were more votes in it for Labour to allow mass immigration.
The big flaw in that argument is that EU citizens can’t vote in general elections.
But they can become British citizens, marry British citizens and procreate British citizens. They can also vote in local elections which gives parties the power base for success at general elections, and become Party members.
Why would an EU citizen have bothered to become a UK citizen prior to the referendum? I am intrigued by your belief that Blair’s plan was to get EU citizens to force UK citizens to fall in love with them in order to produce Labour voting UK citizens 18 years later. I wonder if it worked.
If May goes then pile on #bridgen4pm at any odds. He's the hero we need but not the hero we deserve.
Geoffrey Cox QC the Attorney General would be better, by far the brightest in the Cabinet and probably the richest as well and a Leaver but not an insane one and a brilliant speaker as he showed at the Tory conference as May's warm up. He would slaughter Corbyn at PMQs
Jeremy Hunt is the richest member of the cabinet by far.
Does he earn £700 000 a year still like Cox? Hunt is getting camper by the day and he blew his chances with his conference 'EU prison' gaffe
This might be wishful thinking but any chance that the statement will be:
'We can't agree on a deal with those b*****ds in Brussels. So it is No Deal or Remain. These are such extreme options that I am going back on what I said before and we will have a referendum on that choice.'
Theresa May's weird rant over immigration at the Tory conference a few years ago coupled with her atrocious performance on this issue while at the Home Office should have provided the necessary warning signs. She thinks a successful Brexit is one where the FoM red line is not breached to the exclusion of everything else. Of course back in 2016 we had all those regular reports of sub Saharans etc flooding into southern Europe with the prospect that if we remained in the EU many of them will find their way into the UK. Time has now moved on.
To the extent I blame Leavers it is in their abject failure to provide a credible Leave contender to defeat May in the leadership election in 2016 leaving us with this dysfunctional situation at the top.
Dunno, ending FoM still seems like the main thing the voters are expecting, doesn't it? I know the Tory MPs who have been pushing for Brexit for all these years are mainly interested in the Libertarian Pirate Island angle, but there's no sign the voters are into that, and the Leave campaign wisely said as little as possible about it in the referendum.
The Libertarian Pirate Island angle is the smallest slither of a side issue.
If there hadn't been mass immigration from 2004 onwards, UKIP wouldn't have won the Euros or got 12% at a GE. FoM is the reason the referendum was called, and the reason Leave won. It is all it is about.
Whose fault is that? Blair for failing to impose transition controls on free movement from the new accession countries in 2004 unlike most EU nations
There were more votes in it for Labour to allow mass immigration.
The big flaw in that argument is that EU citizens can’t vote in general elections.
But they can become British citizens, marry British citizens and procreate British citizens. They can also vote in local elections which gives parties the power base for success at general elections, and become Party members.
Why would an EU citizen have bothered to become a UK citizen prior to the referendum? I am intrigued by your belief that Blair’s plan was to get EU citizens to force UK citizens to fall in love with them in order to produce Labour voting UK citizens 18 years later. I wonder if it worked.
Those on the losing side in the referendum like to claim there was no defined way of leaving, different people were motivated to vote by different factors etc, so how can it ever be reasonable to decide that because Theresa May's understanding of what Brexit means isn't available, there should be another vote, or we should just Remain?
did.
Fantastic. That's excellent. So channelling Liam Fox it will be the easiest process in history. So why does it seem to be such a balls up?
My personal opinion on why it is such a balls up is that it is because it is being negotiated by people who think leaving is the wrong thing to do.
I think you are probably right, but they were not helped by the red lines which were put in place to appease those who thought that leaving was the right thing to do and that their version of leaving in particular was the one we should (have) pursue(d).
No FoM red line and a lot of problems go away. But of course the British public in polls have said they don't like foreigners, but this is where May should have lead not followed. She manifestly doesn't want to bring immigration down because she didn't do so when she was in charge of it, so she should have backed herself and said that FoM will be mitigated by all kinds of permissible restraints but that it is more important to leave the political structures of the EU which is how she interpreted the vote.
She did none of these things, thus infuriating leavers and remainers alike. Problem is, as the tweet above mentions, she is dealing with international treaties, not the Home Office, where no one cares from one fudge to another, not to say they don't notice them.
Opposing FoM is not the same as disliking foreigners
Though the overlap in that venn diagram is huge.
Thoroughly disagree. Concerns over FOM have always been high, but look at how many votes an overtly racist party gets in UK - 1-2% maximum.
Both Tories and UKIP campaigned on massive reductions in immigration, rather cheekily considering Mrs May completely failed to do so as Home Secretary. We all know that anti-immigration feeling was the big driver of the Leave vote.
Incidentally, it was you who used the term racism, I merely pointed out that those opposing FOM dislike foreigners.
Merely pointing out your opinion you mean, which is highly likely to be incorrect. Most people opposing FoM are neither racist nor dislike foreigners
Not if EUref2 before next March if No Deal and Remain wins
How do the timescales work for another referendum before March?
They don’t.
But this is another one of HYUFD’s hobby horses that he’ll go quiet on soon enough, like Hunt will never succeed May or Boris is nailed on to replace May.
No Deal has -33% approval with ICM and Remain beats No Deal 55% to 45% with Yougov. If it looks like No Deal in November there are 4 months to hold EUref2 before Brexit Day.
No Deal is unsustainable with such opposition, otherwise Parliament will vote for the Norway option ultimately
Opinion polls don’t have an impact on Parliamentary rules and procedures.
Plus your scenario requires the support of at least 150 Labour MPs.
They may prefer to topple the government and then deliver their own Brexit.
Yes and what would a Labour Brexit be? Stay in a Customs Union and stay in the Single Market in all but name
This might be wishful thinking but any chance that the statement will be:
'We can't agree on a deal with those b*****ds in Brussels. So it is No Deal or Remain. These are such extreme options that I am going back on what I said before and we will have a referendum on that choice.'
Sir Graham Brady's postman would have a hernia tomorrow morning if she proposed that.
Theresa May's weird rant over immigration at the Tory conference a few years ago coupled with her atrocious performance on this issue while at the Home Office should have provided the necessary warning signs. She thinks a successful Brexit is one where the FoM red line is not breached to the exclusion of everything else. Of course back in 2016 we had all those regular reports of sub Saharans etc flooding into southern Europe with the prospect that if we remained in the EU many of them will find their way into the UK. Time has now moved on.
To the extent I blame Leavers it is in their abject failure to provide a credible Leave contender to defeat May in the leadership election in 2016 leaving us with this dysfunctional situation at the top.
Dunno, ending FoM still seems like the main thing the voters are expecting, doesn't it? I know the Tory MPs who have been pushing for Brexit for all these years are mainly interested in the Libertarian Pirate Island angle, but there's no sign the voters are into that, and the Leave campaign wisely said as little as possible about it in the referendum.
The Libertarian Pirate Island angle is the smallest slither of a side issue.
If there hadn't been mass immigration from 2004 onwards, UKIP wouldn't have won the Euros or got 12% at a GE. FoM is the reason the referendum was called, and the reason Leave won. It is all it is about.
Whose fault is that? Blair for failing to impose transition controls on free movement from the new accession countries in 2004 unlike most EU nations
There were more votes in it for Labour to allow mass immigration.
The big flaw in that argument is that EU citizens can’t vote in general elections.
But they can become British citizens, marry British citizens and procreate British citizens. They can also vote in local elections which gives parties the power base for success at general elections, and become Party members.
Why would an EU citizen have bothered to become a UK citizen prior to the referendum? I am intrigued by your belief that Blair’s plan was to get EU citizens to force UK citizens to fall in love with them in order to produce Labour voting UK citizens 18 years later. I wonder if it worked.
We’ll soon find out, but that was not my point. EU citizens can vote immediately in all elections except general elections.
Those on the losing side in the referendum like to claim there was no defined way of leaving, different people were motivated to vote by different factors etc, so how can it ever be reasonable to decide that because Theresa May's understanding of what Brexit means isn't available, there should be another vote, or we should just Remain?
I understand that they think any kind of leaving is a disaster, but we all knew they thought that before the vote, that's why they didn't want to leave, but more people did.
Fantastic. That's excellent. So channelling Liam Fox it will be the easiest process in history. So why does it seem to be such a balls up?
My personal opinion on why it is such a balls up is that it is because it is being negotiated by people who think leaving is the wrong thing to do.
I think you are probably right, but they were not helped by the red lines which were put in place to appease those who thought that leaving was the right thing to do and that their version of leaving in particular was the one we should (have) pursue(d).
No FoM red line and a lot of problems go away. But of course the British public in polls have said they don't like foreigners, but this is where May should have lead not followed. She manifestly doesn't want to bring immigration down because she didn't do so when she was in charge of it, so she should have backed herself and said that FoM will be mitigated by all kinds of permissible restraints but that it is more important to leave the political structures of the EU which is how she interpreted the vote.
She did none of these things, thus infuriating leavers and remainers alike. Problem is, as the tweet above mentions, she is dealing with international treaties, not the Home Office, where no one cares from one fudge to another, not to say they don't notice them.
Opposing FoM is not the same as disliking foreigners
Though the overlap in that venn diagram is huge.
Data?
I’m sure there is some overlap but the U.K. is the most tolerant EU country
Moreover as someone posted up thread there is a clear majority (60%+?) support for treating EU immigration like immigration from other parts of the world
Of course, that position could be met by extending FoM to the rest of the world...
If May goes then pile on #bridgen4pm at any odds. He's the hero we need but not the hero we deserve.
Geoffrey Cox QC the Attorney General would be better, by far the brightest in the Cabinet and probably the richest as well and a Leaver but not an insane one and a brilliant speaker as he showed at the Tory conference as May's warm up. He would slaughter Corbyn at PMQs
Why is his wealth relevant?
It shows he has had a successful career outside politics plus he is very bright and about time we had a fiercely bright PM, we certainly need one at the moment
If May goes then pile on #bridgen4pm at any odds. He's the hero we need but not the hero we deserve.
Geoffrey Cox QC the Attorney General would be better, by far the brightest in the Cabinet and probably the richest as well and a Leaver but not an insane one and a brilliant speaker as he showed at the Tory conference as May's warm up. He would slaughter Corbyn at PMQs
He looks like a fucking Benjamin Netanyahu action figure.
A depressed looking flabby middle aged white man is not what the tories need.
He looks quite cheerful, actually.
But otherwise correct; as a reminder of the 1950s he'll appeal to quite a small demographic (though quite a large percentage of the Tory membership).
If May goes then pile on #bridgen4pm at any odds. He's the hero we need but not the hero we deserve.
Geoffrey Cox QC the Attorney General would be better, by far the brightest in the Cabinet and probably the richest as well and a Leaver but not an insane one and a brilliant speaker as he showed at the Tory conference as May's warm up. He would slaughter Corbyn at PMQs
He looks like a fucking Benjamin Netanyahu action figure.
A depressed looking flabby middle aged white man is not what the tories need.
The Cod Churchill that Cox delivers so well enthralls Cod Churchillians, but Cod Churchill is not going to make the entirely self-inflicted realities of a No Deal any more enticing.
Given how many brexit supporters see winning the Cod Wars as one of the key opportunities of leaving he could be an ideal fit.
If May goes then pile on #bridgen4pm at any odds. He's the hero we need but not the hero we deserve.
Geoffrey Cox QC the Attorney General would be better, by far the brightest in the Cabinet and probably the richest as well and a Leaver but not an insane one and a brilliant speaker as he showed at the Tory conference as May's warm up. He would slaughter Corbyn at PMQs
Why is his wealth relevant?
It shows he has had a successful career outside politics plus he is very bright and about time we had a fiercely bright PM, we certainly need one at the moment
We need a Wilson. Very clever and a genius at party management.
Even he would struggle to get enough MPs through his lobby at the moment.
This might be wishful thinking but any chance that the statement will be:
'We can't agree on a deal with those b*****ds in Brussels. So it is No Deal or Remain. These are such extreme options that I am going back on what I said before and we will have a referendum on that choice.'
Sir Graham Brady's postman would have a hernia tomorrow morning if she proposed that.
This might be wishful thinking but any chance that the statement will be:
'We can't agree on a deal with those b*****ds in Brussels. So it is No Deal or Remain. These are such extreme options that I am going back on what I said before and we will have a referendum on that choice.'
Sir Graham Brady's postman would have a hernia tomorrow morning if she proposed that.
If May goes then pile on #bridgen4pm at any odds. He's the hero we need but not the hero we deserve.
Geoffrey Cox QC the Attorney General would be better, by far the brightest in the Cabinet and probably the richest as well and a Leaver but not an insane one and a brilliant speaker as he showed at the Tory conference as May's warm up. He would slaughter Corbyn at PMQs
He looks like a fucking Benjamin Netanyahu action figure.
A depressed looking flabby middle aged white man is not what the tories need.
The Cod Churchill that Cox delivers so well enthralls Cod Churchillians, but Cod Churchill is not going to make the entirely self-inflicted realities of a No Deal any more enticing.
Given how many brexit supporters see winning the Cod Wars as one of the key opportunities of leaving he could be an ideal fit.
With overfishing, there aren't many cod of his size these days....
Rather interested to observe that when Israel beat Scotland at football last week (not much of an achievement as everyone beats Scotland at football) three of their players were Arabs; so much for those who call Israel an "apartheid state".
There used to be 3 or 4 Arabs in the Scotland team but Dundee United are in a bad place at the moment.
If May goes then pile on #bridgen4pm at any odds. He's the hero we need but not the hero we deserve.
Geoffrey Cox QC the Attorney General would be better, by far the brightest in the Cabinet and probably the richest as well and a Leaver but not an insane one and a brilliant speaker as he showed at the Tory conference as May's warm up. He would slaughter Corbyn at PMQs
Jeremy Hunt is the richest member of the cabinet by far.
Does he earn £700 000 a year still like Cox? Hunt is getting camper by the day and he blew his chances with his conference 'EU prison' gaffe
Hunt is also quite stare-y.
I don't accept that the 'EU prison' comment blew his chances - it's not like others haven't said worse - but he doesn't come with a helpful political background. Whether justified or not (I don't think it is but that's beside the point), his time as Health Sec is a big negative for him. he remains a possible compromise candidate but I doubt he has enough positive support that transfers would make a difference.
A lot of people thought Theresa May's 2015 conference speech ("Not in a thousand years") wouldn't help her. They were wrong.
Sir Graham Brady's postman would have a hernia tomorrow morning if she proposed that.
If the PM has announced it, can they stop it by deposing her?
Well it would need Parliamentary approval, so she can announce it, but I'd expect at least 80 Tory MPs, 9/10 DUP MPs, and maybe a half dozen Labour MPs opposing. I could see that Tory figure being as high as 140.
So unless she's got close to 150 Labour MPs ready to back her, a second referendum wouldn't be happening.
This might be wishful thinking but any chance that the statement will be:
'We can't agree on a deal with those b*****ds in Brussels. So it is No Deal or Remain. These are such extreme options that I am going back on what I said before and we will have a referendum on that choice.'
It really is shit or get off the pot. She can't delay reality any longer - the other leaders have already had to be told the UK haven't got anything to talk about at this week's summit. So surely one of a few remaining options
1. Delusion. "I am going to cross my arms and stamp my feet and say "shan't. Then we'll win" 2. Desperation. "We are going to stay in the EEA/CU and MPs either have to accept this or I will put it to the people" 3. Resignation. "I cannot reach an agreement that will honour the deal. I am therefore going to Her Majesty at the conclusion of this statement and resign as PM" 4. Annihilation. "The EU are beasts. There can be no deal and leaving the EU with No Deal is now the policy of this government"
Rather interested to observe that when Israel beat Scotland at football last week (not much of an achievement as everyone beats Scotland at football) three of their players were Arabs; so much for those who call Israel an "apartheid state".
There used to be 3 or 4 Arabs in the Scotland team but Dundee United are in a bad place at the moment.
Don't be pessimistic, in Andy Robertson Carlos, Scotland have the world's best left back.
Sir Graham Brady's postman would have a hernia tomorrow morning if she proposed that.
If the PM has announced it, can they stop it by deposing her?
Well it would need Parliamentary approval, so she can announce it, but I'd expect at least 80 Tory MPs, 9/10 DUP MPs, and maybe a half dozen Labour MPs opposing. I could see that Tory figure being as high as 140.
So unless she's got close to 150 Labour MPs ready to back her, a second referendum wouldn't be happening.
Labour's approach is likely to depend on what would most infuriate the DUP and the various Tory malcontents and lead to a successful NC vote/vote against the Budget. If getting a second referendum voted through was a necessary step I'd think that at least 80% of the PLP could be whipped to back it.
Theresa May's weird rant over immigration at the Tory conference a few years ago coupled with her atrocious performance on this issue while at the Home Office should have provided the necessary warning signs. She thinks a successful Brexit is one where the FoM red line is not breached to the exclusion of everything else. Of course back in 2016 we had all those regular reports of sub Saharans etc flooding into southern Europe with the prospect that if we remained in the EU many of them will find their way into the UK. Time has now moved on.
To the extent I blame Leavers it is in their abject failure to provide a credible Leave contender to defeat May in the leadership election in 2016 leaving us with this dysfunctional situation at the top.
Dunno, ending no sign the voters are into that, and the Leave campaign wisely said as little as possible about it in the referendum.
The Libertarian Pirate Island angle is the smallest slither of a side issue.
If there hadn't been mass immigration from 2004 onwards, UKIP wouldn't have won the Euros or got 12% at a GE. FoM is the reason the referendum was called, and the reason Leave won. It is all it is about.
Whose fault is that? Blair for failing to impose transition controls on free movement from the new accession countries in 2004 unlike most EU nations
There were more votes in it for Labour to allow mass immigration.
The big flaw in that argument is that EU citizens can’t vote in general elections.
But they can become British citizens, marry British citizens and procreate British citizens. They can also vote in local elections which gives parties the power base for success at general elections, and become Party members.
Why would an EU citizen have bothered to become a UK citizen prior to the referendum? I am intrigued by your belief that Blair’s plan was to get EU citizens to force UK citizens to fall in love with them in order to produce Labour voting UK citizens 18 years later. I wonder if it worked.
We’ll soon find out, but that was not my point. EU citizens can vote immediately in all elections except general elections.
So Blair’s plan was to flood the UK with EU citizens so that Labour could win local elections. I see. Clearly, it didn’t work. Maybe the EU citizens who came were Tories, LibDems and nationalists.
Rather interested to observe that when Israel beat Scotland at football last week (not much of an achievement as everyone beats Scotland at football) three of their players were Arabs; so much for those who call Israel an "apartheid state".
There used to be 3 or 4 Arabs in the Scotland team but Dundee United are in a bad place at the moment.
Don't be pessimistic, in Andy Robertson Carlos, Scotland have the world's best left back.
He's certainly Scotland's best player by a distance and, of course, a former Arab. But a left back does not make a team.
Sir Graham Brady's postman would have a hernia tomorrow morning if she proposed that.
If the PM has announced it, can they stop it by deposing her?
Well it would need Parliamentary approval, so she can announce it, but I'd expect at least 80 Tory MPs, 9/10 DUP MPs, and maybe a half dozen Labour MPs opposing. I could see that Tory figure being as high as 140.
So unless she's got close to 150 Labour MPs ready to back her, a second referendum wouldn't be happening.
Labour's approach is likely to depend on what would most infuriate the DUP and the various Tory malcontents and lead to a successful NC vote/vote against the Budget. If getting a second referendum voted through was a necessary step I'd think that at least 80% of the PLP could be whipped to back it.
I think there's the potential for a huge difference between what the Labour leadership wants their MPs to do and what their MPs actually do.
Can anyone point out to me who said that we would be able to leave the EU on the same terms? I know someone on here said that a Leave campaigner said it, but I’ve googled it and cannot find it.
If May goes then pile on #bridgen4pm at any odds. He's the hero we need but not the hero we deserve.
Geoffrey Cox QC the Attorney General would be better, by far the brightest in the Cabinet and probably the richest as well and a Leaver but not an insane one and a brilliant speaker as he showed at the Tory conference as May's warm up. He would slaughter Corbyn at PMQs
Jeremy Hunt is the richest member of the cabinet by far.
Does he earn £700 000 a year still like Cox? Hunt is getting camper by the day and he blew his chances with his conference 'EU prison' gaffe
Hunt is also quite stare-y.
I don't accept that the 'EU prison' comment blew his chances - it's not like others haven't said worse - but he doesn't come with a helpful political background. Whether justified or not (I don't think it is but that's beside the point), his time as Health Sec is a big negative for him. he remains a possible compromise candidate but I doubt he has enough positive support that transfers would make a difference.
A lot of people thought Theresa May's 2015 conference speech ("Not in a thousand years") wouldn't help her. They were wrong.
What the May conference speech reminds us punters is not to get too excited till the runners and riders are declared. The main reason Theresa May is now Prime Minister is that she stood. You've got to be in it to win it, and if the other four self-destruct, the last woman standing gets the keys to Number 10.
I expect the vote to be respected (though it is a terrible idea). Some recognition of the concerns of Remainers and some basic civility from Leavers rather than labelling them as traitors, saboteurs, quislings etc (all of which have been making a return this week) would have gone a long way towards getting acquiescence.
Some recognition of the concerns of Leavers and some basic civility from Remainers rather than labelling them as xenophobes, racists, swivel-eyed, etc (all of which have been making a return this week) would have gone a long way towards getting acquiescence.
Leavers want Brexit to work. It’s their job to persuade the unpersuaded. They decided they preferred to try to grind them into the ground. This has proved suboptimal.
Actually die-hards on both sides feed off each other. Their special contempt is reserved for compromisers. You only have to see the vitriol aimed at Dan Hannan in the Telegraph by ultra Leavers or at Caroline Flint by Labour reversers.
Dan Hannan is not a compromiser. He's advocating precisely the version of Brexit that he's always wanted (but disingenuously did not campaign for) and presenting that as a compromise. It's unsurprising he's been completely marginalised. His entire MO has been fraudulent.
Look, absolutely nobody is calling Daniel Hannan a busted flush who would have done better pursuing a career as a stage pixie than going into politics.
Meanwhile, who can come up with a word that means 'permanent backstop' that sounds like it means 'temporary backstop'?
Consensual backstop
(Meaning it only ends by mutual consent but sounds like it only continues by mutual consent)
Very good. I wouldn't actually be surprised if they actually use that. We'll never know if they got from you sadly.
I’ll let you know in about 10 years - by that time most of the guilty have retired
Dunno, ending no sign the voters are into that, and the Leave campaign wisely said as little as possible about it in the referendum.
The Libertarian Pirate Island angle is the smallest slither of a side issue.
If there hadn't been mass immigration from 2004 onwards, UKIP wouldn't have won the Euros or got 12% at a GE. FoM is the reason the referendum was called, and the reason Leave won. It is all it is about.
Whose fault is that? Blair for failing to impose transition controls on free movement from the new accession countries in 2004 unlike most EU nations
There were more votes in it for Labour to allow mass immigration.
The big flaw in that argument is that EU citizens can’t vote in general elections.
But they can become British citizens, marry British citizens and procreate British citizens. They can also vote in local elections which gives parties the power base for success at general elections, and become Party members.
Why would an EU citizen have bothered to become a UK citizen prior to the referendum? I am intrigued by your belief that Blair’s plan was to get EU citizens to force UK citizens to fall in love with them in order to produce Labour voting UK citizens 18 years later. I wonder if it worked.
We’ll soon find out, but that was not my point. EU citizens can vote immediately in all elections except general elections.
So Blair’s plan was to flood the UK with EU citizens so that Labour could win local elections. I see. Clearly, it didn’t work. Maybe the EU citizens who came were Tories, LibDems and nationalists.
There are never votes in promising mass immigration, that's why no party ever tells the public before allowing it. It pleases big business though, who governments listen to more than voters.
Can anyone point out to me who said that we would be able to leave the EU on the same terms? I know someone on here said that a Leave campaigner said it, but I’ve googled it and cannot find it.
IIRC no one said it explicitly, but many heavily implied it.
'Absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the Single Market'.
This might be wishful thinking but any chance that the statement will be:
'We can't agree on a deal with those b*****ds in Brussels. So it is No Deal or Remain. These are such extreme options that I am going back on what I said before and we will have a referendum on that choice.'
It really is shit or get off the pot. She can't delay reality any longer - the other leaders have already had to be told the UK haven't got anything to talk about at this week's summit. So surely one of a few remaining options
1. Delusion. "I am going to cross my arms and stamp my feet and say "shan't. Then we'll win" 2. Desperation. "We are going to stay in the EEA/CU and MPs either have to accept this or I will put it to the people" 3. Resignation. "I cannot reach an agreement that will honour the deal. I am therefore going to Her Majesty at the conclusion of this statement and resign as PM" 4. Annihilation. "The EU are beasts. There can be no deal and leaving the EU with No Deal is now the policy of this government"
The approach will still be delay dressed up as delusion: thkweam and thkwean until all options but one are impossible, then accept that option, whatever it is. In that moment, she then can't be blamed for choosing it. If those who want more control over the outcome don't have the courage to challenge her at any point in the process, then delay and fudge wins by default (and probably looks like an effectively indefinite vassal state 'transition period' under the cover of being an Irish backstop).
If May goes then pile on #bridgen4pm at any odds. He's the hero we need but not the hero we deserve.
Geoffrey Cox QC the Attorney General would be better, by far the brightest in the Cabinet and probably the richest as well and a Leaver but not an insane one and a brilliant speaker as he showed at the Tory conference as May's warm up. He would slaughter Corbyn at PMQs
Why is his wealth relevant?
It shows he has had a successful career outside politics plus he is very bright and about time we had a fiercely bright PM, we certainly need one at the moment
Or that he inherited it, or married it, or won the lottery, or was in the right place at the right time
I’m not sure that an AG has ever gone on to party leader (although Carson was SG before becoming leader of the UUP)
Bear in mind we haven't had the budget yet, and May/Raab aren't sure the DUP votes would be certain with a deal agreed. Once the budget is through, there may be a touch more room to slowly betray the DUP.
Can anyone point out to me who said that we would be able to leave the EU on the same terms? I know someone on here said that a Leave campaigner said it, but I’ve googled it and cannot find it.
IIRC no one said it explicitly, but many heavily implied it.
'Absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the Single Market'.
I am just confused how the labour position seems to be we will have all the same benefits because that is the government position. No one in Government is advocating FoM but that is a benefit. I can’t see where it has come from.
I mean I realize that May is already a joke. Any and all credibility she may have had on Brexit was long dead even by this summer.
But even then, surely SURELY she cannot conceivably be considering pulling a "nothing has changed" this afternoon?
At this point, it is looking for all the world like everyone is starting to agree that a deal is not going to be possible within the time remaining, and Chequers will never form the basis of any deal that might be agreed in the future.
It's not credible that she might claim nothing has changed and expect the EU or her party to swallow such massive amounts bullshit.
I'm beginning to think the EU might be the ones to walk away, and save us all the pain of enduring any more of May's aggravated delusions.
Bear in mind we haven't had the budget yet, and May/Raab aren't sure the DUP votes would be certain with a deal agreed. Once the budget is through, there may be a touch more room to slowly betray the DUP.
Can anyone point out to me who said that we would be able to leave the EU on the same terms? I know someone on here said that a Leave campaigner said it, but I’ve googled it and cannot find it.
IIRC no one said it explicitly, but many heavily implied it.
'Absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the Single Market'.
I am just confused how the labour position seems to be we will have all the same benefits because that is the government position. No one in Government is advocating FoM but that is a benefit. I can’t see where it has come from.
It's the whole have cake and eat it approach of Vote Leave.
Can anyone point out to me who said that we would be able to leave the EU on the same terms? I know someone on here said that a Leave campaigner said it, but I’ve googled it and cannot find it.
IIRC no one said it explicitly, but many heavily implied it.
'Absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the Single Market'.
Sir Graham Brady's postman would have a hernia tomorrow morning if she proposed that.
If the PM has announced it, can they stop it by deposing her?
Well it would need Parliamentary approval, so she can announce it, but I'd expect at least 80 Tory MPs, 9/10 DUP MPs, and maybe a half dozen Labour MPs opposing. I could see that Tory figure being as high as 140.
So unless she's got close to 150 Labour MPs ready to back her, a second referendum wouldn't be happening.
Labour's approach is likely to depend on what would most infuriate the DUP and the various Tory malcontents and lead to a successful NC vote/vote against the Budget. If getting a second referendum voted through was a necessary step I'd think that at least 80% of the PLP could be whipped to back it.
I think there's the potential for a huge difference between what the Labour leadership wants their MPs to do and what their MPs actually do.
That's probably right if there's a one-off opportunity to impose a significant delay or obstacle to Brexit - there would be 100+ Labour votes on that, though 150 might be tough. The calculation they would have to make is how the Tories would spin it in strongly leave marginals at the next GE. It *shouldn't* be possible for the Tories to paint Labour as the reason for Brexit failing as a result of Labour MPs supporting a Tory government's motion... but Lib Dems in 2015 and SLAB MPs post Indyref would have some scars to point to.
If May goes then pile on #bridgen4pm at any odds. He's the hero we need but not the hero we deserve.
Geoffrey Cox QC the Attorney General would be better, by far the brightest in the Cabinet and probably the richest as well and a Leaver but not an insane one and a brilliant speaker as he showed at the Tory conference as May's warm up. He would slaughter Corbyn at PMQs
Jeremy Hunt is the richest member of the cabinet by far.
Does he earn £700 000 a year still like Cox? Hunt is getting camper by the day and he blew his chances with his conference 'EU prison' gaffe
Can I suggest you tone down the certainty?
Life is full of gray shading
Yet you are prepared to go for No Deal
Of course I am
If the terms of the Deal were that we had to deliver 12 maidens and 12 young men in chains to Rome each Eastertide would you accept it?
Can anyone point out to me who said that we would be able to leave the EU on the same terms? I know someone on here said that a Leave campaigner said it, but I’ve googled it and cannot find it.
IIRC no one said it explicitly, but many heavily implied it.
'Absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the Single Market'.
Who said that during the referendum itself after Vote Leave explicitly made its proposal we would leave the Single Market?
Those on the losing side in the referendum like to claim there was no defined way of leaving, different people were motivated to vote by different factors etc, so how can it ever be reasonable to decide that because Theresa May's understanding of what Brexit means isn't available, there should be another vote, or we should just Remain?
I understand that they think any kind of leaving is a disaster, but we all knew they thought that before the vote, that's why they didn't want to leave, but more people did.
Fantastic. That's excellent. So channelling Liam Fox it will be the easiest process in history. So why does it seem to be such a balls up?
My personal opinion on why it is such a balls up is that it is because it is being negotiated by people who think leaving is the wrong thing to do.
I think you are probably right, but they were not helped by the red lines which were put in place to appease those who thought that leaving was the right thing to do and that their version of leaving in particular was the one we should (have) pursue(d).
No FoM red line and a lot of problems go away. But of course the British public in polls have said they don't like foreigners, but this is where May should have lead not followed. She manifestly doesn't want to bring immigration down because she didn't do so when she was in charge of it, so she should have backed herself and said that FoM will be mitigated by all kinds of permissible restraints but that it is more important to leave the political structures of the EU which is how she interpreted the vote.
She did none of these things, thus infuriating leavers and remainers alike. Problem is, as the tweet above mentions, she is dealing with international treaties, not the Home Office, where no one cares from one fudge to another, not to say they don't notice them.
Opposing FoM is not the same as disliking foreigners
Though the overlap in that venn diagram is huge.
Data?
I’m sure there is some overlap but the U.K. is the most tolerant EU country
Moreover as someone posted up thread there is a clear majority (60%+?) support for treating EU immigration like immigration from other parts of the world
Of course, that position could be met by extending FoM to the rest of the world...
Yes. Although I doubt the welfare budget would wear it
Can anyone point out to me who said that we would be able to leave the EU on the same terms? I know someone on here said that a Leave campaigner said it, but I’ve googled it and cannot find it.
IIRC no one said it explicitly, but many heavily implied it.
'Absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the Single Market'.
Can anyone point out to me who said that we would be able to leave the EU on the same terms? I know someone on here said that a Leave campaigner said it, but I’ve googled it and cannot find it.
IIRC no one said it explicitly, but many heavily implied it.
'Absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the Single Market'.
I am just confused how the labour position seems to be we will have all the same benefits because that is the government position. No one in Government is advocating FoM but that is a benefit. I can’t see where it has come from.
It's the whole have cake and eat it approach of Vote Leave.
Difference is, Labour are aware it's unattainable cake. By demanding impossible cake, that gives them full cover to vote down anything May brings back, which they were going to do anyway, but now they can do the bullshit Brexit dance of looking principled by sticking stubbornly to red lines they know are unachievable.
Can anyone point out to me who said that we would be able to leave the EU on the same terms? I know someone on here said that a Leave campaigner said it, but I’ve googled it and cannot find it.
IIRC no one said it explicitly, but many heavily implied it.
'Absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the Single Market'.
Rather interested to observe that when Israel beat Scotland at football last week (not much of an achievement as everyone beats Scotland at football) three of their players were Arabs; so much for those who call Israel an "apartheid state".
There used to be 3 or 4 Arabs in the Scotland team but Dundee United are in a bad place at the moment.
Don't be pessimistic, in Andy Robertson Carlos, Scotland have the world's best left back.
He's certainly Scotland's best player by a distance and, of course, a former Arab. But a left back does not make a team.
Especially when you will not play him at left back either
If May goes then pile on #bridgen4pm at any odds. He's the hero we need but not the hero we deserve.
Geoffrey Cox QC the Attorney General would be better, by far the brightest in the Cabinet and probably the richest as well and a Leaver but not an insane one and a brilliant speaker as he showed at the Tory conference as May's warm up. He would slaughter Corbyn at PMQs
Jeremy Hunt is the richest member of the cabinet by far.
Does he earn £700 000 a year still like Cox? Hunt is getting camper by the day and he blew his chances with his conference 'EU prison' gaffe
Can I suggest you tone down the certainty?
Life is full of gray shading
Yet you are prepared to go for No Deal
Of course I am
If the terms of the Deal were that we had to deliver 12 maidens and 12 young men in chains to Rome each Eastertide would you accept it?
As long as it's billed as a reboot of Love Island, you'd have volunteers queuing round the block.
Can anyone point out to me who said that we would be able to leave the EU on the same terms? I know someone on here said that a Leave campaigner said it, but I’ve googled it and cannot find it.
IIRC no one said it explicitly, but many heavily implied it.
'Absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the Single Market'.
Can anyone point out to me who said that we would be able to leave the EU on the same terms? I know someone on here said that a Leave campaigner said it, but I’ve googled it and cannot find it.
IIRC no one said it explicitly, but many heavily implied it.
'Absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the Single Market'.
If May goes then pile on #bridgen4pm at any odds. He's the hero we need but not the hero we deserve.
Geoffrey Cox QC the Attorney General would be better, by far the brightest in the Cabinet and probably the richest as well and a Leaver but not an insane one and a brilliant speaker as he showed at the Tory conference as May's warm up. He would slaughter Corbyn at PMQs
Jeremy Hunt is the richest member of the cabinet by far.
Does he earn £700 000 a year still like Cox? Hunt is getting camper by the day and he blew his chances with his conference 'EU prison' gaffe
Can I suggest you tone down the certainty?
Life is full of gray shading
Yet you are prepared to go for No Deal
Of course I am
If the terms of the Deal were that we had to deliver 12 maidens and 12 young men in chains to Rome each Eastertide would you accept it?
As long as it's billed as a reboot of Love Island, you'd have volunteers queuing round the block.
If May goes then pile on #bridgen4pm at any odds. He's the hero we need but not the hero we deserve.
Geoffrey Cox QC the Attorney General would be better, by far the brightest in the Cabinet and probably the richest as well and a Leaver but not an insane one and a brilliant speaker as he showed at the Tory conference as May's warm up. He would slaughter Corbyn at PMQs
Jeremy Hunt is the richest member of the cabinet by far.
Does he earn £700 000 a year still like Cox? Hunt is getting camper by the day and he blew his chances with his conference 'EU prison' gaffe
Can I suggest you tone down the certainty?
Life is full of gray shading
Yet you are prepared to go for No Deal
Of course I am
If the terms of the Deal were that we had to deliver 12 maidens and 12 young men in chains to Rome each Eastertide would you accept it?
As long as it's billed as a reboot of Love Island, you'd have volunteers queuing round the block.
Non Angli, sed Angeli
I think the modern version might switch 'Angli" and 'Angeli' around.
If May goes then pile on #bridgen4pm at any odds. He's the hero we need but not the hero we deserve.
Geoffrey Cox QC the Attorney General would be better, by far the brightest in the Cabinet and probably the richest as well and a Leaver but not an insane one and a brilliant speaker as he showed at the Tory conference as May's warm up. He would slaughter Corbyn at PMQs
Jeremy Hunt is the richest member of the cabinet by far.
Does he earn £700 000 a year still like Cox? Hunt is getting camper by the day and he blew his chances with his conference 'EU prison' gaffe
Can I suggest you tone down the certainty?
Life is full of gray shading
Yet you are prepared to go for No Deal
Of course I am
If the terms of the Deal were that we had to deliver 12 maidens and 12 young men in chains to Rome each Eastertide would you accept it?
As long as it's billed as a reboot of Love Island, you'd have volunteers queuing round the block.
Can anyone point out to me who said that we would be able to leave the EU on the same terms? I know someone on here said that a Leave campaigner said it, but I’ve googled it and cannot find it.
IIRC no one said it explicitly, but many heavily implied it.
'Absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the Single Market'.
Who said that during the referendum itself after Vote Leave explicitly made its proposal we would leave the Single Market?
Do you have a 2016 date for the quote?
The Vote Leave leaflet contained the... shall we say... ambiguous line "There is a free trade zone from Iceland to the Russian border and we will be part of it".
Can anyone point out to me who said that we would be able to leave the EU on the same terms? I know someone on here said that a Leave campaigner said it, but I’ve googled it and cannot find it.
I think perhaps it's David Davis saying this in 2017 to Anna Soubry:
"What we have come up with—I hope to persuade her that this is a very worthwhile aim—is the idea of a comprehensive free trade agreement and a comprehensive customs agreement that will deliver the exact same benefits as we have, but also enable my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for International Trade to go and form trade deals with the rest of the world, which is the real upside of leaving the European Union."
Can anyone point out to me who said that we would be able to leave the EU on the same terms? I know someone on here said that a Leave campaigner said it, but I’ve googled it and cannot find it.
IIRC no one said it explicitly, but many heavily implied it.
'Absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the Single Market'.
Who said that during the referendum itself after Vote Leave explicitly made its proposal we would leave the Single Market?
Do you have a 2016 date for the quote?
The Vote Leave leaflet contained the... shall we say... ambiguous line "There is a free trade zone from Iceland to the Russian border and we will be part of it".
It gets even more confused when you read on:
There is a European free trade zone from Iceland to the Russian border and we will be part of it. The heart of what we all want is the continuation of tariff-free trade with minimal bureaucracy. Countries as far away as Australia have Mutual Recognition agreements with the EU that deal with complex customs (and other ‘non-tariff barrier’) issues. We will do the same.
More importantly than Brexit is the Saudi threat to turn off the taps if people impose sanctions re Khashoggi.
That's an astonishing upping of the stakes.
Not the threat it once was, in the era of fracking.
Not to the US. Europe would have a bit more of a problem. We really should have got on with fracking.
Very unpopular anywhere it is carried out, and rightly so. Lee Rowley (Con-NE Derbyshire) realises what a threat to his seat it could be at the next GE, he is opposed now and I expect other Tories will follow if it comes to their constituency.
Comments
I don't accept that the 'EU prison' comment blew his chances - it's not like others haven't said worse - but he doesn't come with a helpful political background. Whether justified or not (I don't think it is but that's beside the point), his time as Health Sec is a big negative for him. he remains a possible compromise candidate but I doubt he has enough positive support that transfers would make a difference.
2) You talked about the richest member of the cabinet not the highest earning member
3) Hunt is worth around £17 million pounds, mostly from the sale of his businesses.
I had the misfortune to see some of the game last night
'We can't agree on a deal with those b*****ds in Brussels. So it is No Deal or Remain. These are such extreme options that I am going back on what I said before and we will have a referendum on that choice.'
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/unitedkingdom/en/your-meps/european_elections/can_i_vote.html
But otherwise correct; as a reminder of the 1950s he'll appeal to quite a small demographic (though quite a large percentage of the Tory membership).
Even he would struggle to get enough MPs through his lobby at the moment.
"You deserved it" isn't exactly noblesse oblige, either.
So unless she's got close to 150 Labour MPs ready to back her, a second referendum wouldn't be happening.
1. Delusion. "I am going to cross my arms and stamp my feet and say "shan't. Then we'll win"
2. Desperation. "We are going to stay in the EEA/CU and MPs either have to accept this or I will put it to the people"
3. Resignation. "I cannot reach an agreement that will honour the deal. I am therefore going to Her Majesty at the conclusion of this statement and resign as PM"
4. Annihilation. "The EU are beasts. There can be no deal and leaving the EU with No Deal is now the policy of this government"
😇
https://twitter.com/Pulpstar/status/1051808304236781569
'Absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the Single Market'.
Bloody typical.
I’m not sure that an AG has ever gone on to party leader (although Carson was SG before becoming leader of the UUP)
Once the budget is through, there may be a touch more room to slowly betray the DUP.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/3/27/17144198/gerrymandering-brennan-center-report-midterms-democrats-house-2018
But even then, surely SURELY she cannot conceivably be considering pulling a "nothing has changed" this afternoon?
At this point, it is looking for all the world like everyone is starting to agree that a deal is not going to be possible within the time remaining, and Chequers will never form the basis of any deal that might be agreed in the future.
It's not credible that she might claim nothing has changed and expect the EU or her party to swallow such massive amounts bullshit.
I'm beginning to think the EU might be the ones to walk away, and save us all the pain of enduring any more of May's aggravated delusions.
I'll say to Labour what I said to Vote Leave.
https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/722391453599723520
If the terms of the Deal were that we had to deliver 12 maidens and 12 young men in chains to Rome each Eastertide would you accept it?
Do you have a 2016 date for the quote?
Can it be both?
He deserved worse. This was mercy.
Just keep the appraisal short and you wont miss the resignation/'nothing has changed' speech.*
*delete as appropriate
16 down. They could hack off Conservative Brexiteers (8)
We have 52 Old Maids
"What we have come up with—I hope to persuade her that this is a very worthwhile aim—is the idea of a comprehensive free trade agreement and a comprehensive customs agreement that will deliver the exact same benefits as we have, but also enable my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for International Trade to go and form trade deals with the rest of the world, which is the real upside of leaving the European Union."
https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2017-01-24/debates/d423aee6-be36-4935-ad6a-5ca316582a9c/article50
There is a European free trade zone from Iceland to the Russian border and we will be part of it. The heart of what we all want is the continuation of tariff-free trade with minimal bureaucracy. Countries as far away as Australia have Mutual Recognition agreements with the EU that deal with complex customs (and other ‘non-tariff barrier’) issues. We will do the same.
http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/briefing_newdeal.html
That's an astonishing upping of the stakes.
-£20 TX and ND DEM
-£10 TX or ND DEM
+£10 TX and ND GOP.