politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The DUP are not as supportive of Brexit or as united as it might appear
There’s a widespread assumption that the party that supports TMay’s minority government, the DUP with its 10 MPs, is rock solid in its view on Brexit and there’s no wiggle room.
She hasn't mentioned "Chequers" since Salzburg - referring it to as 'the July plan" - but with many rubbishing the name, what else should she do?
While I am not one for cynical rebranding of ideas, it does work on occasion and in fairness even as a more interested than most in Brexit kind of person I cannot keep straight what all the various options mean and what they are called.
Surely the most significant news regarding the DUPs position was it being backed recently by Ruth Davidson?
Much harder to denigrate the successful openly gay leader of the Scottish Tories (who is the only reason Corbyn isn't PM after May's election backfired) as a homophobic backwoodsmen that should be ignored.
Whether or not Ada Lovelace ought to be known as “the first computer programmer,” her program was specified with a degree of rigor that far surpassed anything that came before.
In many ways her insight was utterly remarkable:
She foresaw that a computing machine's fundamental relations could be expressed by those of the abstract science of operations and therefore should be also be manipulable by adaptations to the action of the operating notation and mechanism of the machine. She was the first person to use branches, loops and subroutines in a program. She was the first person to realise the full scope of what might be computable, given the necessary resources.
In that sense she stumbled across the idea of the universal Turing machine a whole *century* before Turing did.
Surely the most significant news regarding the DUPs position was it being backed recently by Ruth Davidson?
Much harder to denigrate the successful openly gay leader of the Scottish Tories (who is the only reason Corbyn isn't PM after May's election backfired) as a homophobic backwoodsmen that should be ignored.
Ruthy D has a history of promising red lines then surrendering, just ask the Scottish fishing community.
"Downing Street confirms the PM will have three bilateral meetings in Brussels to make her case to key players before tonight’s dinner - Donald Tusk, Jean-Claude Juncker and Leo Varadkar."
That's three times the number opportunities for the tin-eared autist to provoke another Salzburg-style bully-ramming.
We are fucked.
May's "nothing has changed" on Friday after the EU put the boot in and walk away is going to be beautiful in a tragic, dadaist way.
May telling the EU she really does not have the parliamentary support for the options they are currently insisting upon is not bully ramming, and the leaks from Salzburg were patently nonsense (apparently the refusal was on points of principle, but wait no, now they were actually really upset by her bluntness and that lay behind some of their language, thus not being a strong refusal on principle), her saying that would be the truth.
They may well, and indeed probably would not, regard that as reason why they should change their minds, but there's little point in her giving in to what they want, then coming back and telling them she cannot get that through parliament - she's already tried that with her own offer to them which they have rejected and she couldn't get through parliament either.
I have to say I am not sure where this 'autist' talk has come from in recent months either, just because May is awkward, and it seems to be used pejoratively a lot.
Surely the most significant news regarding the DUPs position was it being backed recently by Ruth Davidson?
Much harder to denigrate the successful openly gay leader of the Scottish Tories (who is the only reason Corbyn isn't PM after May's election backfired) as a homophobic backwoodsmen that should be ignored.
Ruthy D has a history of promising red lines then surrendering, just ask the Scottish fishing community.
It does sometimes seem that some really apparently pro Brexit people may not be so pro given they seem intent on sabotaging any form of Brexit which has even a chance of getting through the Commons, while some really apparently anti no deal people may not be so anti given they seem intent on sabotaging any action which might prevent no deal.
"Downing Street confirms the PM will have three bilateral meetings in Brussels to make her case to key players before tonight’s dinner - Donald Tusk, Jean-Claude Juncker and Leo Varadkar."
That's three times the number opportunities for the tin-eared autist to provoke another Salzburg-style bully-ramming.
We are fucked.
May's "nothing has changed" on Friday after the EU put the boot in and walk away is going to be beautiful in a tragic, dadaist way.
May telling the EU she really does not have the parliamentary support for the options they are currently insisting upon is not bully ramming, and the leaks from Salzburg were patently nonsense (apparently the refusal was on points of principle, but wait no, now they were actually really upset by her bluntness and that lay behind some of their language, thus not being a strong refusal on principle), her saying that would be the truth.
They may well, and indeed probably would not, regard that as reason why they should change their minds, but there's little point in her giving in to what they want, then coming back and telling them she cannot get that through parliament - she's already tried that with her own offer to them which they have rejected and she couldn't get through parliament either.
I have to say I am not sure where this 'autist' talk has come from in recent months either, just because May is awkward, and it seems to be used pejoratively a lot.
Mr. kle4, don't underestimate man's capacity to misjudge things.
Nicias thought Athens intervening in Sicily was foolish. He tried to stop it by emphasising how much force would be needed. The city ended up sending a huge number of men and ships, and defeat there led to defeat to Sparta.
Nick Clegg... why is he considered of any importance rather than an abject failure?
He came across well on telly for an hour in Spring 2010, ok...
In 2011 he sold out his voters by reneging on his party's flagship policy, in 2014 he was bested by Nigel Farage in the Euro debate, in 2015 he led his party to near wipeout, in 2016 he played a prominent role in losing the referendum, then in 2017 he got booted out of Sheffield by the least impressive MP ever to take a seat in the HofC
He was deputy Prime Minister for five years. Whether you like him or not, he is of importance.
He had the courage to put the nation's interests first at a time of tremendous economic dislocation at a considerable cost to himself and his party.
Considerable cost to himself?
He was elevated from obscure third party politician who only gets attention when the media needs to show the third party to being the most meaningful deputy Prime Minister that post has ever had, key part of the 'quad' that authorised all government actions, member of the cabinet, ministerial limo, pay increase and attention that has allowed him to generate personal wealth from public speaking etc afterwards.
He may have cost his party, he may have cost his colleagues their jobs, but not himself.
By forming a coalition with the Conservatives, the Lib Dems (led by Clegg) steered the UK out of economic collapse so that we have the full employment and manageable deficit we have today. Of course the electorate normally fails to show gratitude (eg Churchchill kicked out post the war).
I agree. I think the Cameron/Clegg government was easily the best government of my adult life (2000 onwards).
But it wasn't formed at a considerable cost to Clegg.
Very true. First most of his councillors then most of his MPs picked up the tab.
If only he had had the sense to insist on STV for local elections rather than that dumb AV referendum
It does sound a better idea looking back on it.
But on the other point while Clegg must take responsibility as Leader (though I think history will be kinder to his decision to enter coalition and stick with it the full term than the voters were), did not the party vote to agree to do it, they didn't go in without party consent?
It does sometimes seem that some really apparently pro Brexit people may not be so pro given they seem intent on sabotaging any form of Brexit which has even a chance of getting through the Commons, while some really apparently anti no deal people may not be so anti given they seem intent on sabotaging any action which might prevent no deal.
thats simply because Brexit is a wide church with many opinions. The view that Brexiteers are all outier than Nigel Farage is just guff to keep hardline remainers happy and does no one a service.
Mr. kle4, don't underestimate man's capacity to misjudge things.
Nicias thought Athens intervening in Sicily was foolish. He tried to stop it by emphasising how much force would be needed. The city ended up sending a huge number of men and ships, and defeat there led to defeat to Sparta.
More recently, the German 'blank piece of paper' reinforced Austria's intent to declare war on Serbia. We see people choosing to believe that which they wish to believe on here each and every day.
"Downing Street confirms the PM will have three bilateral meetings in Brussels to make her case to key players before tonight’s dinner - Donald Tusk, Jean-Claude Juncker and Leo Varadkar."
That's three times the number opportunities for the tin-eared autist to provoke another Salzburg-style bully-ramming.
We are fucked.
May's "nothing has changed" on Friday after the EU put the boot in and walk away is going to be beautiful in a tragic, dadaist way.
I have to say I am not sure where this 'autist' talk has come from in recent months either, just because May is awkward, and it seems to be used pejoratively a lot.
As Mrs Thatcher observed:
I always cheer up immensely if an attack is particularly wounding because I think, well, if they attack one personally, it means they have not a single political argument left.
Nick Clegg... why is he considered of any importance rather than an abject failure?
He came acrosur in Spring 2010, ok...
In 2011 he sold out his voters by reneging on his party's flagship policy, in 2014 he was bested by Nigel Farage in the Euro debate, in 2015 he led his party to near wipeout, in 2016 he played a prominent role in losing the referendum, then in 2017 he got booted out of Sheffield by the least impressive MP ever to take a seat in the HofC
He was deputy Prime Minister for five years. Whether you like him or not, he is of importance.
He had the courage to put the nation's interests first at a time of tremendous economic dislocation at a considerable cost to himself and his party.
Considerable cost to himself?
He was elevated from obscure third party politician who only gets attention when the media needs to show the third party to being the most meaningful deputy Prime Minister that post has ever had, key part of the 'quad' that authorised all government actions, member of the cabinet, ministerial limo, pay increase and attention that has allowed him to generate personal wealth from public speaking etc afterwards.
He may have cost his party, he may have cost his colleagues their jobs, but not himself.
By forming a coalition with the Conservatives, the Lib Dems (led by Clegg) steered the UK out of economic collapse so that we have the full employment and manageable deficit we have today. Of course the electorate normally fails to show gratitude (eg Churchchill kicked out post the war).
I agree. I think the Cameron/Clegg government was easily the best government of my adult life (2000 onwards).
But it wasn't formed at a considerable cost to Clegg.
Very true. First most of his councillors then most of his MPs picked up the tab.
If only he had had the sense to insist on STV for local elections rather than that dumb AV referendum
It does sound a better idea looking back on it.
But on the other point while Clegg must take responsibility as Leader (though I think history will be kinder to his decision to enter coalition and stick with it the full term than the voters were), did not the party vote to agree to do it, they didn't go in without party consent?
We now know the mistake on AV was the ballot paper question. It should have been "Should we remain with first past the post or leave first past the post?" Then when 52% of people voted leave, it would simply be a matter of obeying the will of the people to leave. Simples!
Provided the UK stays in the single market and customs union through the Transition Period and until a technical solution is found to the Irish border there is no reason for the DUP to oppose a backstop keeping NI in the single market and customs union.
That is especially so as polls show most Northern Irish voters want to stay in the single market and customs union anyway and could vote for a United Ireland if Northern Ireland leaves the single market and customs union with a No Deal Brexit
The DUP is a relatively small bloc of 10 MPs. In normal circumstances this makes them fairly irrelevant in the HoC. At the moment, courtesy of Mrs May's election fiasco, they are very relevant but only so long as they stick together as a group and their leader can deliver that group without question.
In short, whatever internal discussions may go on or differences of views might be expressed behind closed doors they will continue to operate as a bloc. It is the only way that they can stay relevant (and they must be enjoying that experience enormously).
Say what you like about TM she is on top of her brief
I cannot imagine anyone else handling this nightmare any better to be honest
She may be but I think you lack imagination.
I have listened to brexiteer after brexiteer and they simply dream the impossible dream
Some definitely. But that's true of some on every side of every divide.
My pick would be Gove. He's on top of his brief and can think the unthinkable and make it work anywhere he's worked - education, justice or DEFRA. He's a true Brexiteer but also a true realist and could reach an agreement.
His big weakness is that he's not personally likeable, but then May shares that with him. So he's an all round improvement.
Say what you like about TM she is on top of her brief
I cannot imagine anyone else handling this nightmare any better to be honest
She may be but I think you lack imagination.
I have listened to brexiteer after brexiteer and they simply dream the impossible dream
Some definitely. But that's true of some on every side of every divide.
My pick would be Gove. He's on top of his brief and can think the unthinkable and make it work anywhere he's worked - education, justice or DEFRA. He's a true Brexiteer but also a true realist and could reach an agreement.
His big weakness is that he's not personally likeable, but then May shares that with him. So he's al all round improvement.
Unless we agree the backstop there will be no agreement, even if Churchill came back to lead the Tories
Say what you like about TM she is on top of her brief
I cannot imagine anyone else handling this nightmare any better to be honest
Really? The nightmare is mainly of her own doing. She decided to play party politics with Brexit in an attempt to destroy the Labour party and as a result boxed herself in with a series of red lines and lost her Commons majority.
If she had made an attempt to heal the divide in the nation by forging a consensus on Brexit that most people could mostly live with then we wouldn't be in half this mess.
Say what you like about TM she is on top of her brief
I cannot imagine anyone else handling this nightmare any better to be honest
She may be but I think you lack imagination.
I have listened to brexiteer after brexiteer and they simply dream the impossible dream
Some definitely. But that's true of some on every side of every divide.
My pick would be Gove. He's on top of his brief and can think the unthinkable and make it work anywhere he's worked - education, justice or DEFRA. He's a true Brexiteer but also a true realist and could reach an agreement.
His big weakness is that he's not personally likeable, but then May shares that with him. So he's an all round improvement.
Gove impresses both myself and my family especially in his present role
There is an interesting point buried in that thread. The threat to the DUP position isn't so much the presence of the EU--NI backstop as the absence of a UK-NI one. In other words the real threat to the NI status quo that benefits the DUP position isn't so much NI being tied into the EU as the UK diverging from it over time and without reference to Northern Ireland.
Say what you like about TM she is on top of her brief
I cannot imagine anyone else handling this nightmare any better to be honest
Really? The nightmare is mainly of her own doing. She decided to play party politics with Brexit in an attempt to destroy the Labour party and as a result boxed herself in with a series of red lines and lost her Commons majority.
If she had made an attempt to heal the divide in the nation by forging a consensus on Brexit that most people could mostly live with then we wouldn't be in half this mess.
I do not think there has ever been enough consensus for consensus
Say what you like about TM she is on top of her brief
I cannot imagine anyone else handling this nightmare any better to be honest
She may be but I think you lack imagination.
I have listened to brexiteer after brexiteer and they simply dream the impossible dream
Some definitely. But that's true of some on every side of every divide.
My pick would be Gove. He's on top of his brief and can think the unthinkable and make it work anywhere he's worked - education, justice or DEFRA. He's a true Brexiteer but also a true realist and could reach an agreement.
His big weakness is that he's not personally likeable, but then May shares that with him. So he's al all round improvement.
Unless we agree the backstop there will be no agreement
There is legal doubt whether a measure intended to have permanent effect, such as the backstop, can even be agreed on the basis of Article 50, which is about arrangements for departure and not final outcomes. Even if the UK and EU27 agreed to a permanent backstop as part of the withdrawal agreement, it is not obvious that it could ever be enforced at law. It rests on Article 50 alone.
To say that the backstop requirement should not be part of the withdrawal agreement is not to say it should be ignored. But it could have been dealt with by other means so that the withdrawal arrangements for citizenship, the financial settlement, the transition arrangements and so on were not in jeopardy. Indeed, in view of its sheer importance, a backstop should be a distinct agreement between the UK, Ireland and the rest of the EU, and not something shoehorned into an agreement intended for exit issues.
If there is still no progress on the backstop issue in the next month or so, the UK and EU should consider opening a separate dialogue on the Irish border issue, with the view to a discrete agreement. All sides should accept that such permanent arrangements (and the nature of a backstop is potentially permanent) on a sensitive topic are better dealt with other than in an exit agreement.
There is an interesting point buried in that thread. The threat to the DUP position isn't so much the presence of the EU--NI backstop as the absence of a UK-NI one. In other words the real threat to the NI status quo that benefits the DUP position isn't so much NI being tied into the EU as the UK diverging from it over time and without reference to Northern Ireland.
This might sound like a pedantic point, but it explains the position. The United Kingdom IS the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, indivisible.
So your post reframed as the DUP would see it is thus:
The threat to the DUP position isn't so much the presence of the EU-NI(only) backstop as the absence of a UK(Excluding NI)-NI one. In other words the real threat to the NI status quo that benefits the DUP position isn't so much NI being tied into the EU as the UK(Excluding NI) diverging from it over time and without reference to Northern Ireland.
The backstop can be read 'both ways', nowhere does it state explicitly apply that the backstop is to NI only. That is something the EU have said 'after the fact' and spun for, but there simply is no EU-NI(Only) backstop as far as the DUP is concerned, and nor will there ever be. That is the blood red line.
Say what you like about TM she is on top of her brief
I cannot imagine anyone else handling this nightmare any better to be honest
Really? The nightmare is mainly of her own doing. She decided to play party politics with Brexit in an attempt to destroy the Labour party and as a result boxed herself in with a series of red lines and lost her Commons majority.
If she had made an attempt to heal the divide in the nation by forging a consensus on Brexit that most people could mostly live with then we wouldn't be in half this mess.
There is now no consensus everyone can live with.
Remainers and the Scots and Irish will never accept No Deal and WTO terms and Leavers will never accept an EUref2 leading to Remain and most would not accept staying in the single market and customs union either. The EU as is clear will never accept Chequers nor will most Leavers and Remainers either.
The only reasonable position of consensus would be a Canada style FTA but that can only be done for GB not NI
Say what you like about TM she is on top of her brief
I cannot imagine anyone else handling this nightmare any better to be honest
Really? The nightmare is mainly of her own doing. She decided to play party politics with Brexit in an attempt to destroy the Labour party and as a result boxed herself in with a series of red lines and lost her Commons majority.
If she had made an attempt to heal the divide in the nation by forging a consensus on Brexit that most people could mostly live with then we wouldn't be in half this mess.
I do not think there has ever been enough consensus for consensus
No, but it's not so long ago we were talking about coming up with a deal that the 60% could live with, with 20% of core Brexit fans / Remainers angry on either side. Even that feels unachievable now, it's just about getting a deal, any deal, to avoid catastrophe.
Say what you like about TM she is on top of her brief
I cannot imagine anyone else handling this nightmare any better to be honest
She may be but I think you lack imagination.
I have listened to brexiteer after brexiteer and they simply dream the impossible dream
Some definitely. But that's true of some on every side of every divide.
My pick would be Gove. He's on top of his brief and can think the unthinkable and make it work anywhere he's worked - education, justice or DEFRA. He's a true Brexiteer but also a true realist and could reach an agreement.
His big weakness is that he's not personally likeable, but then May shares that with him. So he's al all round improvement.
Unless we agree the backstop there will be no agreement
There is legal doubt whether a measure intended to have permanent effect, such as the backstop, can even be agreed on the basis of Article 50, which is about arrangements for departure and not final outcomes. Even if the UK and EU27 agreed to a permanent backstop as part of the withdrawal agreement, it is not obvious that it could ever be enforced at law. It rests on Article 50 alone.
To say that the backstop requirement should not be part of the withdrawal agreement is not to say it should be ignored. But it could have been dealt with by other means so that the withdrawal arrangements for citizenship, the financial settlement, the transition arrangements and so on were not in jeopardy. Indeed, in view of its sheer importance, a backstop should be a distinct agreement between the UK, Ireland and the rest of the EU, and not something shoehorned into an agreement intended for exit issues.
If there is still no progress on the backstop issue in the next month or so, the UK and EU should consider opening a separate dialogue on the Irish border issue, with the view to a discrete agreement. All sides should accept that such permanent arrangements (and the nature of a backstop is potentially permanent) on a sensitive topic are better dealt with other than in an exit agreement.
Say what you like about TM she is on top of her brief
I cannot imagine anyone else handling this nightmare any better to be honest
Really? The nightmare is mainly of her own doing. She decided to play party politics with Brexit in an attempt to destroy the Labour party and as a result boxed herself in with a series of red lines and lost her Commons majority.
If she had made an attempt to heal the divide in the nation by forging a consensus on Brexit that most people could mostly live with then we wouldn't be in half this mess.
I do not think there has ever been enough consensus for consensus
No, but it's not so long ago we were talking about coming up with a deal that the 60% could live with, with 20% of core Brexit fans / Remainers angry on either side. Even that feels unachievable now, it's just about getting a deal, any deal, to avoid catastrophe.
I actually think it is achievable but we need to be patient. The next few weeks upto Christmas will be very interesting
Say what you like about TM she is on top of her brief
I cannot imagine anyone else handling this nightmare any better to be honest
Really? The nightmare is mainly of her own doing. She decided to play party politics with Brexit in an attempt to destroy the Labour party and as a result boxed herself in with a series of red lines and lost her Commons majority.
If she had made an attempt to heal the divide in the nation by forging a consensus on Brexit that most people could mostly live with then we wouldn't be in half this mess.
I do not think there has ever been enough consensus for consensus
No, but it's not so long ago we were talking about coming up with a deal that the 60% could live with, with 20% of core Brexit fans / Remainers angry on either side. Even that feels unachievable now, it's just about getting a deal, any deal, to avoid catastrophe.
"Any deal" regardless of merit would be a catastrophe.
Say what you like about TM she is on top of her brief
I cannot imagine anyone else handling this nightmare any better to be honest
Really? The nightmare is mainly of her own doing. She decided to play party politics with Brexit in an attempt to destroy the Labour party and as a result boxed herself in with a series of red lines and lost her Commons majority.
If she had made an attempt to heal the divide in the nation by forging a consensus on Brexit that most people could mostly live with then we wouldn't be in half this mess.
I do not think there has ever been enough consensus for consensus
No, but it's not so long ago we were talking about coming up with a deal that the 60% could live with, with 20% of core Brexit fans / Remainers angry on either side. Even that feels unachievable now, it's just about getting a deal, any deal, to avoid catastrophe.
"Any deal" regardless of merit would be a catastrophe.
Say what you like about TM she is on top of her brief
I cannot imagine anyone else handling this nightmare any better to be honest
Really? The nightmare is mainly of her own doing. She decided to play party politics with Brexit in an attempt to destroy the Labour party and as a result boxed herself in with a series of red lines and lost her Commons majority.
If she had made an attempt to heal the divide in the nation by forging a consensus on Brexit that most people could mostly live with then we wouldn't be in half this mess.
I do not think there has ever been enough consensus for consensus
No, but it's not so long ago we were talking about coming up with a deal that the 60% could live with, with 20% of core Brexit fans / Remainers angry on either side. Even that feels unachievable now, it's just about getting a deal, any deal, to avoid catastrophe.
"Any deal" regardless of merit would be a catastrophe.
No Deal which crashes the economy and potentially leads to Scotland and Northern Ireland leaving the UK would be a catastrophe
Say what you like about TM she is on top of her brief
I cannot imagine anyone else handling this nightmare any better to be honest
Really? The nightmare is mainly of her own doing. She decided to play party politics with Brexit in an attempt to destroy the Labour party and as a result boxed herself in with a series of red lines and lost her Commons majority.
If she had made an attempt to heal the divide in the nation by forging a consensus on Brexit that most people could mostly live with then we wouldn't be in half this mess.
I do not think there has ever been enough consensus for consensus
No, but it's not so long ago we were talking about coming up with a deal that the 60% could live with, with 20% of core Brexit fans / Remainers angry on either side. Even that feels unachievable now, it's just about getting a deal, any deal, to avoid catastrophe.
I actually think it is achievable but we need to be patient. The next few weeks upto Christmas will be very interesting
When should we stop being patient and start panicking?
Say what you like about TM she is on top of her brief
I cannot imagine anyone else handling this nightmare any better to be honest
She may be but I think you lack imagination.
I have listened to brexiteer after brexiteer and they simply dream the impossible dream
Some definitely. But that's true of some on every side of every divide.
My pick would be Gove. He's on top of his brief and can think the unthinkable and make it work anywhere he's worked - education, justice or DEFRA. He's a true Brexiteer but also a true realist and could reach an agreement.
His big weakness is that he's not personally likeable, but then May shares that with him. So he's al all round improvement.
Unless we agree the backstop there will be no agreement
There is legal doubt whether a measure intended to have permanent effect, such as the backstop, can even be agreed on the basis of Article 50, which is about arrangements for departure and not final outcomes. Even if the UK and EU27 agreed to a permanent backstop as part of the withdrawal agreement, it is not obvious that it could ever be enforced at law. It rests on Article 50 alone.
To say that the backstop requirement should not be part of the withdrawal agreement is not to say it should be ignored. But it could have been dealt with by other means so that the withdrawal arrangements for citizenship, the financial settlement, the transition arrangements and so on were not in jeopardy. Indeed, in view of its sheer importance, a backstop should be a distinct agreement between the UK, Ireland and the rest of the EU, and not something shoehorned into an agreement intended for exit issues.
If there is still no progress on the backstop issue in the next month or so, the UK and EU should consider opening a separate dialogue on the Irish border issue, with the view to a discrete agreement. All sides should accept that such permanent arrangements (and the nature of a backstop is potentially permanent) on a sensitive topic are better dealt with other than in an exit agreement.
An agreement to not mess with the Irish border in a binding or destructive way is still an agreement. It really doesn't matter until the end of the transition anyway...
I see you're peddling back from your extreme position of 'We must surrender at all costs' of last night.
Fracking protestors released by High Court. Been a big story in NW.
We should be fracking fracking fracking.
Lee Rowley is seeing the light on this one, it's going to be a great way for Tories to lose marginals and frequently in seats that should otherwise be trending towards the blues.
Say what you like about TM she is on top of her brief
I cannot imagine anyone else handling this nightmare any better to be honest
Really? The nightmare is mainly of her own doing. She decided to play party politics with Brexit in an attempt to destroy the Labour party and as a result boxed herself in with a series of red lines and lost her Commons majority.
If she had made an attempt to heal the divide in the nation by forging a consensus on Brexit that most people could mostly live with then we wouldn't be in half this mess.
I do not think there has ever been enough consensus for consensus
No, but it's not so long ago we were talking about coming up with a deal that the 60% could live with, with 20% of core Brexit fans / Remainers angry on either side. Even that feels unachievable now, it's just about getting a deal, any deal, to avoid catastrophe.
We will reach a point though, and it might come closer than Brussels expects, where we say. Bring it on, if that’s what you want. That’s what will happen.
It will be ugly though, ugly for us, ugly for the EU and ugly for Ireland.
May telling the EU she really does not have the parliamentary support for the options they are currently insisting upon is not bully ramming.
The EU27 know well the perilousness of May's parliamentary arithmetic, they're not idiots. However:
1) They feel that May's dismal position is entirely self-inflicted, and her attempts to use a mixture of weaponised pity and tabloid jingoism to try to bully the EU into thinking that it's somehow their problem has (rightly) fallen on deaf ears.
2) They have, like everyone else, "done the math", and realised that the best chance they've got of getting what they want is to ensure that May remains entirely isolated on all fronts, so her only way out is either SM/CU with Labour support, a second referendum, or a catastrophic Brexit.
Interesting header. It did occur to me the other day that the DUP, having realised that Brexit would bring a united Ireland nearer, might be getting cold feet about the whole idea and had decided to kibosh the backstop in the hope that the threat of no deal would lead to the whole process collapsing. They could then blame May and/or the EU and leave themselves in the clear with their supporters.
Say what you like about TM she is on top of her brief
I cannot imagine anyone else handling this nightmare any better to be honest
She may be but I think you lack imagination.
I have listened to brexiteer after brexiteer and they simply dream the impossible dream
Some definitely. But that's true of some on every side of every divide.
His big weakness is that he's not personally likeable, but then May shares that with him. So he's al all round improvement.
Unless we agree the backstop there will be no agreement
There is legal doubt whether a measure intended to have permanent effect, such as the backstop, can even be agreed on the basis of Article 50, which is about arrangements for departure and not final outcomes. Even if the UK and EU27 agreed to a permanent backstop as part of the withdrawal agreement, it is not obvious that it could ever be enforced at law. It rests on Article 50 alone.
To say that the backstop requirement should not be part of the withdrawal agreement is not to say it should be ignored. But it could have been dealt with by other means so that the withdrawal arrangements for citizenship, the financial settlement, the transition arrangements and so on were not in jeopardy. Indeed, in view of its sheer importance, a backstop should be a distinct agreement between the UK, Ireland and the rest of the EU, and not something shoehorned into an agreement intended for exit issues.
If there is still no progress on the backstop issue in the next month or so, the UK and EU should consider opening a separate dialogue on the Irish border issue, with the view to a discrete agreement. All sides should accept that such permanent arrangements (and the nature of a backstop is potentially permanent) on a sensitive topic are better dealt with other than in an exit agreement.
The brutal truth is that the EU27 may now fail in their objective to strike a withdrawal agreement in time for the UK’s departure, because of this one matter. If the backstop was something the EU had insisted on from the beginning, then perhaps it should have been a non-negotiable demand. But it was not — it was a proposal adopted some way in to the process and was adopted as a means to an end, rather than an end itself.
Fracking protestors released by High Court. Been a big story in NW.
We should be fracking fracking fracking.
Who is going to pick up the bill for any small earthquakes caused? Are the frackers big enough to afford it, or required to post insurance? America has the advantage that most of it is hundreds of miles from anywhere. In Britain, everywhere is just a few miles up the road from somewhere that matters.
Fracking protestors released by High Court. Been a big story in NW.
We should be fracking fracking fracking.
Who is going to pick up the bill for any small earthquakes caused? Are the frackers big enough to afford it, or required to post insurance? America has the advantage that most of it is hundreds of miles from anywhere. In Britain, everywhere is just a few miles up the road from somewhere that matters.
The largest fracking-related tremor ever recorded in the UK was magnitude 3.2. That was, as the British Geological Survey described it, "almost on the verge of being felt".
Say what you like about TM she is on top of her brief
I cannot imagine anyone else handling this nightmare any better to be honest
Really? The nightmare is mainly of her own doing. She decided to play party politics with Brexit in an attempt to destroy the Labour party and as a result boxed herself in with a series of red lines and lost her Commons majority.
If she had made an attempt to heal the divide in the nation by forging a consensus on Brexit that most people could mostly live with then we wouldn't be in half this mess.
I do not think there has ever been enough consensus for consensus
No, but it's not so long ago we were talking about coming up with a deal that the 60% could live with, with 20% of core Brexit fans / Remainers angry on either side. Even that feels unachievable now, it's just about getting a deal, any deal, to avoid catastrophe.
"Any deal" regardless of merit would be a catastrophe.
No Deal which crashes the economy and potentially leads to Scotland and Northern Ireland leaving the UK would be a catastrophe
Just because something is bad doesn't mean the alternative can't be worse.
Chemotherapy is bad, but leukemia is worse. No deal is bad, any deal can be worse.
May telling the EU she really does not have the parliamentary support for the options they are currently insisting upon is not bully ramming.
The EU27 know well the perilousness of May's parliamentary arithmetic, they're not idiots. However:
1) They feel that May's dismal position is entirely self-inflicted, and her attempts to use a mixture of weaponised pity and tabloid jingoism to try to bully the EU into thinking that it's somehow their problem has (rightly) fallen on deaf ears.
2) They have, like everyone else, "done the math", and realised that the best chance they've got of getting what they want is to ensure that May remains entirely isolated on all fronts, so her only way out is either SM/CU with Labour support, a second referendum, or a catastrophic Brexit.
I think that's correct. On 2) - the obvious move for May is to delay it for as long as possible to bringing it to the HoC so it is passed through by ENOUGH of those with a combination of
i) A three line whip (Obviously) ii) An implicit threat to hard Brexiteers that voting this down could well signal the end of Brexit. iii) An implicit threat to hard Remainers that voting this down could well signal a "No Deal" Brexit as we crash out on 29th March 2019. iv) The unity of the UK preserved so the DUP votes it through.
Noone REALLY knows if ii) or iii) prevails in the event of the vote failing, a rare card May still has..
Fracking protestors released by High Court. Been a big story in NW.
We should be fracking fracking fracking.
Who is going to pick up the bill for any small earthquakes caused? Are the frackers big enough to afford it, or required to post insurance? America has the advantage that most of it is hundreds of miles from anywhere. In Britain, everywhere is just a few miles up the road from somewhere that matters.
Is it any worse than the seismic activity associated with coal mining?
Which is why the DUP's support for Brexit seemed so odd. Didn't they see the dangers they were facing?
The DUP loves to play up to its core vote, and it primarily does that by picking a (real or imagined) enemy of the Protestant, and then saying NO to them repeatedly and loudly.
It doesn't really matter to whom. What matters is the NO-ness, the loudness and the repeating-ness.
May is as good an enemy as anyone else. She's too weak to defend herself, too proud to prove them wrong.
Fracking protestors released by High Court. Been a big story in NW.
We should be fracking fracking fracking.
Lee Rowley is seeing the light on this one, it's going to be a great way for Tories to lose marginals and frequently in seats that should otherwise be trending towards the blues.
Certainly this is deep blue territory. There were anti-fracking posters on virtually every other house in the Fylde area last time I was there.
Say what you like about TM she is on top of her brief
I cannot imagine anyone else handling this nightmare any better to be honest
She may be but I think you lack imagination.
I have listened to brexiteer after brexiteer and they simply dream the impossible dream
Some definitely. But that's true of some on every side of every divide.
My pick would be Gove. He's on top of his brief and can think the unthinkable and make it work anywhere he's worked - education, justice or DEFRA. He's a true Brexiteer but also a true realist and could reach an agreement.
His big weakness is that he's not personally likeable, but then May shares that with him. So he's an all round improvement.
Gove impresses both myself and my family especially in his present role
Agreed. He may like Batman be the hero we deserve.
May telling the EU she really does not have the parliamentary support for the options they are currently insisting upon is not bully ramming.
The EU27 know well the perilousness of May's parliamentary arithmetic, they're not idiots. However:
1) They feel that May's dismal position is entirely self-inflicted, and her attempts to use a mixture of weaponised pity and tabloid jingoism to try to bully the EU into thinking that it's somehow their problem has (rightly) fallen on deaf ears.
2) They have, like everyone else, "done the math", and realised that the best chance they've got of getting what they want is to ensure that May remains entirely isolated on all fronts, so her only way out is either SM/CU with Labour support, a second referendum, or a catastrophic Brexit.
.done the Maths, not Math. Math is an American expression we can do well without.
May telling the EU she really does not have the parliamentary support for the options they are currently insisting upon is not bully ramming.
The EU27 know well the perilousness of May's parliamentary arithmetic, they're not idiots. However:
1) They feel that May's dismal position is entirely self-inflicted, and her attempts to use a mixture of weaponised pity and tabloid jingoism to try to bully the EU into thinking that it's somehow their problem has (rightly) fallen on deaf ears.
2) They have, like everyone else, "done the math", and realised that the best chance they've got of getting what they want is to ensure that May remains entirely isolated on all fronts, so her only way out is either SM/CU with Labour support, a second referendum, or a catastrophic Brexit.
It is preposterous to label May's negotiating tactics as bullying while the EU's position is entirely reasonable no matter how demanding it gets. Regardless, the fundamental point is it is not bully ramming for May to tell them the truth that she cannot get what they want through. They can choose not to see that as their problem if they want. (though you seem to be in the camp that thinks reaching deal is the EU doing us a favour when you suggest May's weakness is not also their problem - it is, if they want to get a deal, which they say they do, just not at any cost. It is by far a bigger problem for her, but unless you think they are stupid her weakness is a problem for them).
You have also completely ignored that I pointed out the that EU may well not regard the weakness of May's position as sufficient reason to alter their own position. That doesn't maje it any less true that May cannot give them what they are demanding, and telling the truth is not bullying. Indeed, proponents of the EU are often a great pains to point out that even pointing out harsh truths is not bullying.
May deserves plenty of opprobrium, but the criticisms of her striking a bullish tone, as though people do not talk up their own negotiating position, and that this has had a negative effect on the negotiations for one makes liars out of the EU by making their claims this is about principle false, but is also I think unfair on her because, as noted, she is not lying when she says she cannot bend on some things.
The EU is entitled to play hard ball in this. But May cannot? Maybe she should not, but she cannot? That is going too far, really? The tabloids being given some red meat lines is a step too far?
That's ridiculous. If the EU telling a tough truth is ok, it is ok for May, and I do not buy for one second that the EU leaders and bureaucracy seriously get their feelings hurt by tabloid lines, that they do not understand that politicians need to play for domestic consumption sometimes - there is not a political leader in Europe who does not have to do that.
He was deputy Prime Minister for five years. Whether you like him or not, he is of importance.
He had the courage to put the nation's interests first at a time of tremendous economic dislocation at a considerable cost to himself and his party.
Considerable cost to himself?
He was elevated from obscure third party politician who only gets attention when the media needs to show the third party to being the most meaningful deputy Prime Minister that post has ever had, key part of the 'quad' that authorised all government actions, member of the cabinet, ministerial limo, pay increase and attention that has allowed him to generate personal wealth from public speaking etc afterwards.
He may have cost his party, he may have cost his colleagues their jobs, but not himself.
By forming a coalition with the Conservatives, the Lib Dems (led by Clegg) steered the UK out of economic collapse so that we have the full employment and manageable deficit we have today. Of course the electorate normally fails to show gratitude (eg Churchchill kicked out post the war).
I agree. I think the Cameron/Clegg government was easily the best government of my adult life (2000 onwards).
But it wasn't formed at a considerable cost to Clegg.
Very true. First most of his councillors then most of his MPs picked up the tab.
If only he had had the sense to insist on STV for local elections rather than that dumb AV referendum
That wouldn't have saved the Lib Dems and might have made it worse. The Lib Dems have a poor record in PR elections, from the EP through to devolved assemblies, taking less of the share than they tend to under FPTP.
STV, in wards of c5 members would put a threshold at around 15% - well above the LD average since 2010, so in most wards they still wouldn't be elected. Worse, a lot of that localism work would be lost as you move from electorates of, say, 10000 to ones of 50000. Only in areas where the LDs have a strong enough presence to be winning 2+ wards out of 5 would they do OK under STV - but then in those areas they wouldn't be making gains either.
The Lib Dems might genuinely favour STV for ideological / principled reasons but you can't help notice that it would have been by far the most favourable PR (or PR-like; STV isn't really PR) system to them. But that was when they were a third party with 15-30% of the vote. That's changed; their thinking hasn't.
Varadkar now starting to get boxed in. He wants a GE while his poll numbers are looking good but is now being told he cant have one until Brexit it is out of the way. Coveney now dropping to the ;level of advising the DUP what to do.
Say what you like about TM she is on top of her brief
I cannot imagine anyone else handling this nightmare any better to be honest
She may be but I think you lack imagination.
I have listened to brexiteer after brexiteer and they simply dream the impossible dream
Some definitely. But that's true of some on every side of every divide.
My pick would be Gove. He's on top of his brief and can think the unthinkable and make it work anywhere he's worked - education, justice or DEFRA. He's a true Brexiteer but also a true realist and could reach an agreement.
His big weakness is that he's not personally likeable, but then May shares that with him. So he's an all round improvement.
Gove impresses both myself and my family especially in his present role
Agreed. He may like Batman be the hero we deserve.
An unwelcome analogy - Batman seems to just repeat low level and thuggish actions that don't tackle any serious problems in a way to prevent future recurrences.
May telling the EU she really does not have the parliamentary support for the options they are currently insisting upon is not bully ramming.
The EU27 know well the perilousness of May's parliamentary arithmetic, they're not idiots. However:
1) They feel that May's dismal position is entirely self-inflicted, and her attempts to use a mixture of weaponised pity and tabloid jingoism to try to bully the EU into thinking that it's somehow their problem has (rightly) fallen on deaf ears.
2) They have, like everyone else, "done the math", and realised that the best chance they've got of getting what they want is to ensure that May remains entirely isolated on all fronts, so her only way out is either SM/CU with Labour support, a second referendum, or a catastrophic Brexit.
I think that's correct. On 2) - the obvious move for May is to delay it for as long as possible to bringing it to the HoC so it is passed through by ENOUGH of those with a combination of
i) A three line whip (Obviously) ii) An implicit threat to hard Brexiteers that voting this down could well signal the end of Brexit. iii) An implicit threat to hard Remainers that voting this down could well signal a "No Deal" Brexit as we crash out on 29th March 2019. iv) The unity of the UK preserved so the DUP votes it through.
Noone REALLY knows if ii) or iii) prevails in the event of the vote failing, a rare card May still has..
If the EU's negotiating objective is that the UK remains in the Single Market and Customs Union, would it not have been better to say so from the outset, rather than use the Irish Border as a pretext to achieve that aim?
May telling the EU she really does not have the parliamentary support for the options they are currently insisting upon is not bully ramming.
The EU27 know well the perilousness of May's parliamentary arithmetic, they're not idiots. However:
1) They feel that May's dismal position is entirely self-inflicted, and her attempts to use a mixture of weaponised pity and tabloid jingoism to try to bully the EU into thinking that it's somehow their problem has (rightly) fallen on deaf ears.
2) They have, like everyone else, "done the math", and realised that the best chance they've got of getting what they want is to ensure that May remains entirely isolated on all fronts, so her only way out is either SM/CU with Labour support, a second referendum, or a catastrophic Brexit.
.done the Maths, not Math. Math is an American expression we can do well without.
Winningest is an American expression that has been spreading and should be taken out the back and shot immediately.
Say what you like about TM she is on top of her brief
I cannot imagine anyone else handling this nightmare any better to be honest
She may be but I think you lack imagination.
I have listened to brexiteer after brexiteer and they simply dream the impossible dream
Some definitely. But that's true of some on every side of every divide.
My pick would be Gove. He's on top of his brief and can think the unthinkable and make it work anywhere he's worked - education, justice or DEFRA. He's a true Brexiteer but also a true realist and could reach an agreement.
His big weakness is that he's not personally likeable, but then May shares that with him. So he's an all round improvement.
Gove impresses both myself and my family especially in his present role
Agreed. He may like Batman be the hero we deserve.
An unwelcome analogy - Batman seems to just repeat low level and thuggish actions that don't tackle any serious problems in a way to prevent future recurrences.
If Gove is Batman then he's the George Clooney Batman.
And now I'm thinking about Michael Gove's nipples.
May telling the EU she really does not have the parliamentary support for the options they are currently insisting upon is not bully ramming.
The EU27 know well the perilousness of May's parliamentary arithmetic, they're not idiots. However:
1) They feel that May's dismal position is entirely self-inflicted, and her attempts to use a mixture of weaponised pity and tabloid jingoism to try to bully the EU into thinking that it's somehow their problem has (rightly) fallen on deaf ears.
2) They have, like everyone else, "done the math", and realised that the best chance they've got of getting what they want is to ensure that May remains entirely isolated on all fronts, so her only way out is either SM/CU with Labour support, a second referendum, or a catastrophic Brexit.
I think that's correct. On 2) - the obvious move for May is to delay it for as long as possible to bringing it to the HoC so it is passed through by ENOUGH of those with a combination of
i) A three line whip (Obviously) ii) An implicit threat to hard Brexiteers that voting this down could well signal the end of Brexit. iii) An implicit threat to hard Remainers that voting this down could well signal a "No Deal" Brexit as we crash out on 29th March 2019. iv) The unity of the UK preserved so the DUP votes it through.
Noone REALLY knows if ii) or iii) prevails in the event of the vote failing, a rare card May still has..
If the EU's negotiating objective is that the UK remains in the Single Market and Customs Union, would it not have been better to say so from the outset, rather than use the Irish Border as a pretext to achieve that aim?
I don't actually think it was/is. More that for some reason they believe the indivisibility of the island of Ireland (In EU terms) trumped the integrity of the United Kingdom.
May telling the EU she really does not have the parliamentary support for the options they are currently insisting upon is not bully ramming.
The EU27 know well the perilousness of May's parliamentary arithmetic, they're not idiots. However:
1) They feel that May's dismal position is entirely self-inflicted, and her attempts to use a mixture of weaponised pity and tabloid jingoism to try to bully the EU into thinking that it's somehow their problem has (rightly) fallen on deaf ears.
2) They have, like everyone else, "done the math", and realised that the best chance they've got of getting what they want is to ensure that May remains entirely isolated on all fronts, so her only way out is either SM/CU with Labour support, a second referendum, or a catastrophic Brexit.
I think that's correct. On 2) - the obvious move for May is to delay it for as long as possible to bringing it to the HoC so it is passed through by ENOUGH of those with a combination of
i) A three line whip (Obviously) ii) An implicit threat to hard Brexiteers that voting this down could well signal the end of Brexit. iii) An implicit threat to hard Remainers that voting this down could well signal a "No Deal" Brexit as we crash out on 29th March 2019. iv) The unity of the UK preserved so the DUP votes it through.
Noone REALLY knows if ii) or iii) prevails in the event of the vote failing, a rare card May still has..
If the EU's negotiating objective is that the UK remains in the Single Market and Customs Union, would it not have been better to say so from the outset, rather than use the Irish Border as a pretext to achieve that aim?
Not if they're trying to make it seem like it's the UK's decision to do so.
Had they just come out at the start and said "you must remain in both" that would have been dismissed out of hand as unreasonable. Instead they've salami sliced May's Brexit plans away until we're virtually at that point.
May telling the EU she really does not have the parliamentary support for the options they are currently insisting upon is not bully ramming.
The EU27 know well the perilousness of May's parliamentary arithmetic, they're not idiots. However:
1) They feel that May's dismal position is entirely self-inflicted, and her attempts to use a mixture of weaponised pity and tabloid jingoism to try to bully the EU into thinking that it's somehow their problem has (rightly) fallen on deaf ears.
2) They have, like everyone else, "done the math", and realised that the best chance they've got of getting what they want is to ensure that May remains entirely isolated on all fronts, so her only way out is either SM/CU with Labour support, a second referendum, or a catastrophic Brexit.
I can see that that might not turn out well for them as well as for us.
Say what you like about TM she is on top of her brief
I cannot imagine anyone else handling this nightmare any better to be honest
Really? The nightmare is mainly of her own doing. She decided to play party politics with Brexit in an attempt to destroy the Labour party and as a result boxed herself in with a series of red lines and lost her Commons majority.
If she had made an attempt to heal the divide in the nation by forging a consensus on Brexit that most people could mostly live with then we wouldn't be in half this mess.
I do not think there has ever been enough consensus for consensus
No, but it's not so long ago we were talking about coming up with a deal that the 60% could live with, with 20% of core Brexit fans / Remainers angry on either side. Even that feels unachievable now, it's just about getting a deal, any deal, to avoid catastrophe.
"Any deal" regardless of merit would be a catastrophe.
So your preferred solution is...
a) Delay b) Remain c) Chaos
My preferred solution is for the EU to stop acting like petulant twats who are STILL hurt that we are leaving, and start to get some fucking creative thinking headwear on, so as to implement the least painful Brexit for all us Europeans...
A hard Brexit could ground UK flights for up to three weeks but would be survivable for Ryanair, Michael O'Leary said ahead of a meeting of European Union leaders in Brussels on Wednesday.
Who needs Brexit? His cabin crew and pilots can do that for him no bother...
Say what you like about TM she is on top of her brief
I cannot imagine anyone else handling this nightmare any better to be honest
She may be but I think you lack imagination.
I have listened to brexiteer after brexiteer and they simply dream the impossible dream
Some definitely. But that's true of some on every side of every divide.
My pick would be Gove. He's on top of his brief and can think the unthinkable and make it work anywhere he's worked - education, justice or DEFRA. He's a true Brexiteer but also a true realist and could reach an agreement.
His big weakness is that he's not personally likeable, but then May shares that with him. So he's an all round improvement.
Gove impresses both myself and my family especially in his present role
Agreed. He may like Batman be the hero we deserve.
An unwelcome analogy - Batman seems to just repeat low level and thuggish actions that don't tackle any serious problems in a way to prevent future recurrences.
If Gove is Batman then he's the George Clooney Batman.
And now I'm thinking about Michael Gove's nipples.
If Gove is Clooney then does that make May Poison Ivy?
May telling the EU she really does not have the parliamentary support for the options they are currently insisting upon is not bully ramming.
The EU27 know well the perilousness of May's parliamentary arithmetic, they're not idiots. However:
1) They feel that May's dismal position is entirely self-inflicted, and her attempts to use a mixture of weaponised pity and tabloid jingoism to try to bully the EU into thinking that it's somehow their problem has (rightly) fallen on deaf ears.
2) They have, like everyone else, "done the math", and realised that the best chance they've got of getting what they want is to ensure that May remains entirely isolated on all fronts, so her only way out is either SM/CU with Labour support, a second referendum, or a catastrophic Brexit.
I think that's correct. On 2) - the obvious move for May is to delay it for as long as possible to bringing it to the HoC so it is passed through by ENOUGH of those with a combination of
i) A three line whip (Obviously) ii) An implicit threat to hard Brexiteers that voting this down could well signal the end of Brexit. iii) An implicit threat to hard Remainers that voting this down could well signal a "No Deal" Brexit as we crash out on 29th March 2019. iv) The unity of the UK preserved so the DUP votes it through.
Noone REALLY knows if ii) or iii) prevails in the event of the vote failing, a rare card May still has..
If the EU's negotiating objective is that the UK remains in the Single Market and Customs Union, would it not have been better to say so from the outset, rather than use the Irish Border as a pretext to achieve that aim?
I don't actually think it was/is. More that for some reason they believe the indivisibility of the island of Ireland (In EU terms) trumped the integrity of the United Kingdom.
It is of course possible for them to hold both objectives, which closely align anyway.
Say what you like about TM she is on top of her brief
I cannot imagine anyone else handling this nightmare any better to be honest
She may be but I think you lack imagination.
I have listened to brexiteer after brexiteer and they simply dream the impossible dream
Some definitely. But that's true of some on every side of every divide.
My pick would be Gove. He's on top of his brief and can think the unthinkable and make it work anywhere he's worked - education, justice or DEFRA. He's a true Brexiteer but also a true realist and could reach an agreement.
His big weakness is that he's not personally likeable, but then May shares that with him. So he's an all round improvement.
Gove impresses both myself and my family especially in his present role
Agreed. He may like Batman be the hero we deserve.
An unwelcome analogy - Batman seems to just repeat low level and thuggish actions that don't tackle any serious problems in a way to prevent future recurrences.
If Gove is Batman then he's the George Clooney Batman.
[snip].
Michael Gove is possibly the least-likely Batman ever.
Fracking protestors released by High Court. Been a big story in NW.
We should be fracking fracking fracking.
Lee Rowley is seeing the light on this one, it's going to be a great way for Tories to lose marginals and frequently in seats that should otherwise be trending towards the blues.
Yes, former coalfields are prime territory for Conservative gains, and also for fracking. What could possibly go wrong when you overrule the will of the people in favour of big business?
Say what you like about TM she is on top of her brief
I cannot imagine anyone else handling this nightmare any better to be honest
She may be but I think you lack imagination.
I have listened to brexiteer after brexiteer and they simply dream the impossible dream
Some definitely. But that's true of some on every side of every divide.
My pick would be Gove. He's on top of his brief and can think the unthinkable and make it work anywhere he's worked - education, justice or DEFRA. He's a true Brexiteer but also a true realist and could reach an agreement.
His big weakness is that he's not personally likeable, but then May shares that with him. So he's an all round improvement.
Gove impresses both myself and my family especially in his present role
Agreed. He may like Batman be the hero we deserve.
An unwelcome analogy - Batman seems to just repeat low level and thuggish actions that don't tackle any serious problems in a way to prevent future recurrences.
If Gove is Batman then he's the George Clooney Batman.
And now I'm thinking about Michael Gove's nipples.
If Gove is Clooney then does that make May Poison Ivy?
Coveney now dropping to the ;level of advising the DUP what to do.
That'll end well......
the Irish are increasingly getting themselves boxed in. They were stupid enough to encourage their mad relatives out of the attic. Now Sinn Fein is pushing them to concede nothing ( elections round the corner ) and the DUP are just enjoying the sweating faces.
No good ever comes from winding up the shit in Ulster. It kills careers it doesnt make them and the eejits are looking increasingly squeezed
Part of the problem imo is Varadkars team is made up of professional posh boys in their 30s who have only ever known the success of the Celtic Tiger. It never occurs to them that curmudgeonly Nordies will enjoy dragging them into the abyss with them as much as they enjoy dragging each other down. Stupid politics.
Say what you like about TM she is on top of her brief
I cannot imagine anyone else handling this nightmare any better to be honest
Really? The nightmare is mainly of her own doing. She decided to play party politics with Brexit in an attempt to destroy the Labour party and as a result boxed herself in with a series of red lines and lost her Commons majority.
If she had made an attempt to heal the divide in the nation by forging a consensus on Brexit that most people could mostly live with then we wouldn't be in half this mess.
I do not think there has ever been enough consensus for consensus
No, but it's not so long ago we were talking about coming up with a deal that the 60% could live with, with 20% of core Brexit fans / Remainers angry on either side. Even that feels unachievable now, it's just about getting a deal, any deal, to avoid catastrophe.
"Any deal" regardless of merit would be a catastrophe.
So your preferred solution is...
a) Delay b) Remain c) Chaos
My preferred solution is for the EU to stop acting like petulant twats who are STILL hurt that we are leaving, and start to get some fucking creative thinking headwear on, so as to implement the least painful Brexit for all us Europeans...
UK: I'm leaving you. EU: What? UK: It's not you, it's me. I'm sorry. EU: But... *sobs* UK: Help me pack, will you. And can you sort out a taxi. Cheers. EU: What? UK: WHERE'S MY TAXI YOU PETULANT TWAT?!!?
Good post Alanbrooke. It is a mistake to assume you know what your opponents will do or that they will be logical (as you see it). Assuming that with the DUP was not enlightened.
Fracking protestors released by High Court. Been a big story in NW.
We should be fracking fracking fracking.
Lee Rowley is seeing the light on this one, it's going to be a great way for Tories to lose marginals and frequently in seats that should otherwise be trending towards the blues.
Yes, former coalfields are prime territory for Conservative gains, and also for fracking. What could possibly go wrong when you overrule the will of the people in favour of big business?
Say what you like about TM she is on top of her brief
I cannot imagine anyone else handling this nightmare any better to be honest
She may be but I think you lack imagination.
I have listened to brexiteer after brexiteer and they simply dream the impossible dream
Some definitely. But that's true of some on every side of every divide.
My pick would be Gove. He's on top of his brief and can think the unthinkable and make it work anywhere he's worked - education, justice or DEFRA. He's a true Brexiteer but also a true realist and could reach an agreement.
His big weakness is that he's not personally likeable, but then May shares that with him. So he's an all round improvement.
Gove impresses both myself and my family especially in his present role
Agreed. He may like Batman be the hero we deserve.
An unwelcome analogy - Batman seems to just repeat low level and thuggish actions that don't tackle any serious problems in a way to prevent future recurrences.
If Gove is Batman then he's the George Clooney Batman.
And now I'm thinking about Michael Gove's nipples.
If Gove is Clooney then does that make May Poison Ivy?
Who could be Arnold Schwarzenegger's Mr Freeze?
Boris is Two-Face, obviously.
Arlene Foster is The Joker. Can't be bought and reasoned with.
Comments
Much harder to denigrate the successful openly gay leader of the Scottish Tories (who is the only reason Corbyn isn't PM after May's election backfired) as a homophobic backwoodsmen that should be ignored.
Trump intervenes in Iraq and cancels 15 bn euro contract for Siemens and power stations. Contract now heading to GE
http://www.faz.net/aktuell/wirtschaft/unternehmen/donald-trump-nimmt-siemens-wohl-milliardenauftrag-weg-15842644.html
In many ways her insight was utterly remarkable:
She foresaw that a computing machine's fundamental relations could be expressed by those of the abstract science of operations and therefore should be also be manipulable by adaptations to the action of the operating notation and mechanism of the machine. She was the first person to use branches, loops and subroutines in a program. She was the first person to realise the full scope of what might be computable, given the necessary resources.
In that sense she stumbled across the idea of the universal Turing machine a whole *century* before Turing did.
That has got to be worth commemorating.
They may well, and indeed probably would not, regard that as reason why they should change their minds, but there's little point in her giving in to what they want, then coming back and telling them she cannot get that through parliament - she's already tried that with her own offer to them which they have rejected and she couldn't get through parliament either.
I have to say I am not sure where this 'autist' talk has come from in recent months either, just because May is awkward, and it seems to be used pejoratively a lot.
Northern Rock.
https://twitter.com/emmacpicken/status/1052311106935513088
Edited extra bit: comments following on suggest some did try to intervene but were prevented from doing so.
Nicias thought Athens intervening in Sicily was foolish. He tried to stop it by emphasising how much force would be needed. The city ended up sending a huge number of men and ships, and defeat there led to defeat to Sparta.
But on the other point while Clegg must take responsibility as Leader (though I think history will be kinder to his decision to enter coalition and stick with it the full term than the voters were), did not the party vote to agree to do it, they didn't go in without party consent?
I always cheer up immensely if an attack is particularly wounding because I think, well, if they attack one personally, it means they have not a single political argument left.
I cannot imagine anyone else handling this nightmare any better to be honest
That is especially so as polls show most Northern Irish voters want to stay in the single market and customs union anyway and could vote for a United Ireland if Northern Ireland leaves the single market and customs union with a No Deal Brexit
In short, whatever internal discussions may go on or differences of views might be expressed behind closed doors they will continue to operate as a bloc. It is the only way that they can stay relevant (and they must be enjoying that experience enormously).
My pick would be Gove. He's on top of his brief and can think the unthinkable and make it work anywhere he's worked - education, justice or DEFRA. He's a true Brexiteer but also a true realist and could reach an agreement.
His big weakness is that he's not personally likeable, but then May shares that with him. So he's an all round improvement.
https://twitter.com/IsabelHardman/status/1052524505241915392
If she had made an attempt to heal the divide in the nation by forging a consensus on Brexit that most people could mostly live with then we wouldn't be in half this mess.
https://twitter.com/tommctague/status/1052482507042672640?s=21
There is an interesting point buried in that thread. The threat to the DUP position isn't so much the presence of the EU--NI backstop as the absence of a UK-NI one. In other words the real threat to the NI status quo that benefits the DUP position isn't so much NI being tied into the EU as the UK diverging from it over time and without reference to Northern Ireland.
To say that the backstop requirement should not be part of the withdrawal agreement is not to say it should be ignored. But it could have been dealt with by other means so that the withdrawal arrangements for citizenship, the financial settlement, the transition arrangements and so on were not in jeopardy. Indeed, in view of its sheer importance, a backstop should be a distinct agreement between the UK, Ireland and the rest of the EU, and not something shoehorned into an agreement intended for exit issues.
If there is still no progress on the backstop issue in the next month or so, the UK and EU should consider opening a separate dialogue on the Irish border issue, with the view to a discrete agreement. All sides should accept that such permanent arrangements (and the nature of a backstop is potentially permanent) on a sensitive topic are better dealt with other than in an exit agreement.
https://www.ft.com/content/0df6434e-d12c-11e8-a9f2-7574db66bcd5
So your post reframed as the DUP would see it is thus:
The threat to the DUP position isn't so much the presence of the EU-NI(only) backstop as the absence of a UK(Excluding NI)-NI one. In other words the real threat to the NI status quo that benefits the DUP position isn't so much NI being tied into the EU as the UK(Excluding NI) diverging from it over time and without reference to Northern Ireland.
The backstop can be read 'both ways', nowhere does it state explicitly apply that the backstop is to NI only. That is something the EU have said 'after the fact' and spun for, but there simply is no EU-NI(Only) backstop as far as the DUP is concerned, and nor will there ever be. That is the blood red line.
Remainers and the Scots and Irish will never accept No Deal and WTO terms and Leavers will never accept an EUref2 leading to Remain and most would not accept staying in the single market and customs union either. The EU as is clear will never accept Chequers nor will most Leavers and Remainers either.
The only reasonable position of consensus would be a Canada style FTA but that can only be done for GB not NI
a) Delay
b) Remain
c) Chaos
House prices are rising the fastest in the East Midlands, increasing by 6.5% in the year to August, according to official statistics.
I see you're peddling back from your extreme position of 'We must surrender at all costs' of last night.
It will be ugly though, ugly for us, ugly for the EU and ugly for Ireland.
1) They feel that May's dismal position is entirely self-inflicted, and her attempts to use a mixture of weaponised pity and tabloid jingoism to try to bully the EU into thinking that it's somehow their problem has (rightly) fallen on deaf ears.
2) They have, like everyone else, "done the math", and realised that the best chance they've got of getting what they want is to ensure that May remains entirely isolated on all fronts, so her only way out is either SM/CU with Labour support, a second referendum, or a catastrophic Brexit.
Stranger things have happened.......
Chemotherapy is bad, but leukemia is worse. No deal is bad, any deal can be worse.
i) A three line whip (Obviously)
ii) An implicit threat to hard Brexiteers that voting this down could well signal the end of Brexit.
iii) An implicit threat to hard Remainers that voting this down could well signal a "No Deal" Brexit as we crash out on 29th March 2019.
iv) The unity of the UK preserved so the DUP votes it through.
Noone REALLY knows if ii) or iii) prevails in the event of the vote failing, a rare card May still has..
https://twitter.com/hzeffman/status/1052531952044187649
It doesn't really matter to whom. What matters is the NO-ness, the loudness and the repeating-ness.
May is as good an enemy as anyone else. She's too weak to defend herself, too proud to prove them wrong.
That makes her a perfect target for DUP abuse.
.done the Maths, not Math. Math is an American expression we can do well without.
You have also completely ignored that I pointed out the that EU may well not regard the weakness of May's position as sufficient reason to alter their own position. That doesn't maje it any less true that May cannot give them what they are demanding, and telling the truth is not bullying. Indeed, proponents of the EU are often a great pains to point out that even pointing out harsh truths is not bullying.
May deserves plenty of opprobrium, but the criticisms of her striking a bullish tone, as though people do not talk up their own negotiating position, and that this has had a negative effect on the negotiations for one makes liars out of the EU by making their claims this is about principle false, but is also I think unfair on her because, as noted, she is not lying when she says she cannot bend on some things.
The EU is entitled to play hard ball in this. But May cannot? Maybe she should not, but she cannot? That is going too far, really? The tabloids being given some red meat lines is a step too far?
That's ridiculous. If the EU telling a tough truth is ok, it is ok for May, and I do not buy for one second that the EU leaders and bureaucracy seriously get their feelings hurt by tabloid lines, that they do not understand that politicians need to play for domestic consumption sometimes - there is not a political leader in Europe who does not have to do that.
STV, in wards of c5 members would put a threshold at around 15% - well above the LD average since 2010, so in most wards they still wouldn't be elected. Worse, a lot of that localism work would be lost as you move from electorates of, say, 10000 to ones of 50000. Only in areas where the LDs have a strong enough presence to be winning 2+ wards out of 5 would they do OK under STV - but then in those areas they wouldn't be making gains either.
The Lib Dems might genuinely favour STV for ideological / principled reasons but you can't help notice that it would have been by far the most favourable PR (or PR-like; STV isn't really PR) system to them. But that was when they were a third party with 15-30% of the vote. That's changed; their thinking hasn't.
Varadkar now starting to get boxed in. He wants a GE while his poll numbers are looking good but is now being told he cant have one until Brexit it is out of the way. Coveney now dropping to the ;level of advising the DUP what to do.
https://www.independent.ie/business/brexit/hard-brexit-could-ground-uk-flights-for-three-weeks-but-ryanair-would-survive-michael-oleary-37429645.html
And now I'm thinking about Michael Gove's nipples.
Had they just come out at the start and said "you must remain in both" that would have been dismissed out of hand as unreasonable. Instead they've salami sliced May's Brexit plans away until we're virtually at that point.
https://twitter.com/gavinsblog/status/1052140235033862144
Who needs Brexit? His cabin crew and pilots can do that for him no bother...
Who could be Arnold Schwarzenegger's Mr Freeze?
https://aviationanalyst.co.uk/2018/10/17/flybe-is-in-financial-trouble-analysis/
No good ever comes from winding up the shit in Ulster. It kills careers it doesnt make them and the eejits are looking increasingly squeezed
Part of the problem imo is Varadkars team is made up of professional posh boys in their 30s who have only ever known the success of the Celtic Tiger. It never occurs to them that curmudgeonly Nordies will enjoy dragging them into the abyss with them as much as they enjoy dragging each other down. Stupid politics.
EU: What?
UK: It's not you, it's me. I'm sorry.
EU: But... *sobs*
UK: Help me pack, will you. And can you sort out a taxi. Cheers.
EU: What?
UK: WHERE'S MY TAXI YOU PETULANT TWAT?!!?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efHCdKb5UWc