I must have missed something obvious, but I can't for the life of me see how extending the transition period for a year makes a ha'pence of difference to resolving the artificial obstacle of the Irish backstop, which is supposed to be the stumbling block.
It is solipsism on a national level thinking that things will come round to us eventually.
It was the EU's suggestion, wasn't it?
They presumably are at their wits end and wondered if it would help the PM.
People seem to have wildly different views on their motivations in that sphere, in the some insist the EU are suggesting various thinks to help her, others think they are trying to box her in so she has to cave in and offer referendums or go for a new GE.
I see little evidence to assume the EU27 are in any mood at all to take pity on May. Why would they?
I agree. There was talk of positive mood music over the summer but that turned out to be bollocks, the EU has in my view made it clear they are now committed to playing it very hard indeed and do not care if they get no deal as a result, they are prepared to take that hit vs the chance of the UK totally capitulating.
1) She's an idiot/exhausted/given up caring and has no idea what she's proposed, why, and who it will enrage. 2) She knows that this will achieve nothing, but it's something to say, and kicking the can down the road is all she has left, however little sense it makes. 3) This is a ploy to force her party to VONC her, so she can win it, then capitulate totally to the EU before Christmas. 4) The EU is toying with her, and at this point she's too weak and terrified to even bother arguing 5) We're in the Full Retard timeline
As a child of the 60s the space race and Apollo programme are indelibly etched in my memories. Looking forward to some full-on nostalgia about what is surely a pinnacle of himan achievement
Only four of the twelve who walked on the moon are still alive.
Its entirely possible that at some point there will be no living human who went there.
Something which would have seemed unimaginable fifty years ago baring some subsequent civilisation ending event.
China has an active manned lunar landing programme. Nominally they are aiming for 2036 but I would expect them to bring that date in drastically. The programme seems to be going well and they have a lot of the technology in place.
Man will never go back to the moon, despite the amazing advances in technology over the past 50 years the technology does not exist to get a man to the moon. In 1960 America had never even sent a man into space, yet just 9 years later they landed men on the moon. Just think of the madness of where we are now, even China with all their technology and money can't do it, yet 50 years ago America with no technology could. I have seen First Man , a really good film, what struck me was the lunar lander, it was basically a tin can with silver foil wrapped round it. I really find it hard to believe that something that was possible in 1969 is simply not possible any more.
The other piece of transportation tech dating from 1969, was of course Concorde. Will there ever be another supersonic airliner?
There definitely could be another Concorde, the technology is there, but there is just not the demand for one, compare the Dreamliner to a 707, technology in planes has moved on massively, even Concorde had regular updates. My point is that the technology no longer exists to send a man to the moon and bring them back. Remember in 1971 America sent an electric car to the moon, an electric car in 1971!
I don't understand your point. The actual hardware doesn't exist at the moment but that doesn't mean we have lost the ability to reproduce it. The Chinese are sending rovers to the moon, and I can't see that it would be that much more difficult for them to send astronauts.
My point is why does the technology no longer exist, Its like making a car in 1969, putting it in a museum and then 50 years later not being able to reproduce what that car could do. That's where we are with landing on the moon, we could do it in a world of Morris minors, but in a world of Teslas we can't.
As a child of the 60s the space race and Apollo programme are indelibly etched in my memories. Looking forward to some full-on nostalgia about what is surely a pinnacle of himan achievement
Only four of the twelve who walked on the moon are still alive.
Its entirely possible that at some point there will be no living human who went there.
Something which would have seemed unimaginable fifty years ago baring some subsequent civilisation ending event.
China has an active manned lunar landing programme. Nominally they are aiming for 2036 but I would expect them to bring that date in drastically. The programme seems to be going well and they have a lot of the technology in place.
Man will never go back to the moon, despite the amazing advances in technology over the past 50 years the technology does not exist to get a man to the moon. In 1960 America had never even sent a man into space, yet just 9 years later they landed men on the moon. Just think of the madness of where we are now, even China with all their technology and money can't do it, yet 50 years ago America with no technology could. I have seen First Man , a really good film, what struck me was the lunar lander, it was basically a tin can with silver foil wrapped round it. I really find it hard to believe that something that was possible in 1969 is simply not possible any more.
The other piece of transportation tech dating from 1969, was of course Concorde. Will there ever be another supersonic airliner?
There definitely could be another Concorde, the technology is there, but there is just not the demand for one, compare the Dreamliner to a 707, technology in planes has moved on massively, even Concorde had regular updates. My point is that the technology no longer exists to send a man to the moon and bring them back. Remember in 1971 America sent an electric car to the moon, an electric car in 1971!
I don't understand your point. The actual hardware doesn't exist at the moment but that doesn't mean we have lost the ability to reproduce it. The Chinese are sending rovers to the moon, and I can't see that it would be that much more difficult for them to send astronauts.
All that is lacking is the will, though that does sound dangerously Maoist of me. Perhaps it would be more accurate to say that the necessity is lacking.
There's not much point heading to the Moon. Mars, long term, there is. Long term doesn't generate much necessity for immediate action.
I must have missed something obvious, but I can't for the life of me see how extending the transition period for a year makes a ha'pence of difference to resolving the artificial obstacle of the Irish backstop, which is supposed to be the stumbling block.
It is solipsism on a national level thinking that things will come round to us eventually.
It was the EU's suggestion, wasn't it?
They presumably are at their wits end and wondered if it would help the PM.
It would help the PM, as well as themselves and the European economy, if they'd stop faffing around and start actually negotiating the future relationship, rather than stalling on totally artificial obstacles.
The Irish border is not an artificial obstacle it is one of the most important issues facing the UK.
If 400,000 Brits are applying for residency in France it suggests that estimates of the number of UK citizens living in the EU27 are way too low.
I suspect that many are seasonal residents, rather than permanent. It is quite usual for retired folk to winter abroad, but maintain residence here too.
On that subject, anyone know what Tyson's up to these days? Haven't seen him on the threads in a while.
As is @Richard_Tyndall . I wonder if there's a half-life of contributors, with people just wandering off after awhile.
I must have missed something obvious, but I can't for the life of me see how extending the transition period for a year makes a ha'pence of difference to resolving the artificial obstacle of the Irish backstop, which is supposed to be the stumbling block.
Quite. As someone else has said, it's just another year of doubt and uncertainty, with the same pain at the end anyway. It's worse.
No Deal is better than this.
If we compare Brexit to coming off heroin (and there are odd parallels, and I was once a heroin addict) then this transition period is like going onto methadone, which makes you slightly dopey and slow and addicted to methadone, but is supposedly good, because it gets you off heroin.
However you lose the rush and fun of heroin, and you do not regain the clarity and drive of being totally clean. And then you have to quit methadone anyway, at the end, and that's not fun.
So TMay wants to move us from heroin to methadone, and she's now proposed we stay on methadone an extra year, as if that's a good thing. Why?
I am beginning to think we have to do this cold turkey. Lock ourselves indoors with a load of Valium, booze, a puke bucket, some porn and a couple of DVD box sets, and just sweat out the pain and anguish. It will hurt, a lot, but you get clean quick, and life can start again much faster.
I think we will end up in a near permanent transition, in the Single Market and Customs Union for years but still technically outside the EU but for most purposes still inside it and only the whole UK staying in the Single Market and Customs Union will avoid a hard border in Ireland and appease the DUP.
There is now no majority in Parliament for anything else
There is no majority for the NI backstop. You keep ignoring that.
To be a bit more explicit, I can see why business leaders would want a longer transition, and that there could be an argument for an extra transition year if it is thought that the time is needed to finalise the exact details of a trade deal. However, we haven't even started discussing those details, and they aren't the stumbling block at the moment, so it's bizarre to put this forward as some kind of way forward on the backstop issue.
The backstop comes into force at the end of the transition period if a final trade deal that solves the Irish border problem has not been completed.
Clearly, if there is any chance that a final trade deal would avoid the need for the backstop to come into effect, then providing more time for one to be negotiated makes the use of the backstop less likely.
What it doesn't do is address the (valid/paranoid) concerns of some that a backstop with no end date is an attempt to annex Northern Ireland. Perhaps some concerns are too (crazy/intractable) to address.
But the EU want NI in SMCU. If they have that at the outset there’s no need for them to negotiate.
So one year, or two, or three, or twenty are pointless.
As a child of the 60s the space race and Apollo programme are indelibly etched in my memories. Looking forward to some full-on nostalgia about what is surely a pinnacle of himan achievement
Only four of the twelve who walked on the moon are still alive.
Its entirely possible that at some point there will be no living human who went there.
Something which would have seemed unimaginable fifty years ago baring some subsequent civilisation ending event.
China has an active manned lunar landing programme. Nominally they are aiming for 2036 but I would expect them to bring that date in drastically. The programme seems to be going well and they have a lot of the technology in place.
Man will never go back to the moon, despite the amazing advances in technology over the past 50 years the technology does not exist to get a man to the moon. In 1960 America had never even sent a man into space, yet just 9 years later they landed men on the moon. Just think of the madness of where we are now, even China with all their technology and money can't do it, yet 50 years ago America with no technology could. I have seen First Man , a really good film, what struck me was the lunar lander, it was basically a tin can with silver foil wrapped round it. I really find it hard to believe that something that was possible in 1969 is simply not possible any more.
China will send people to the moon. They have an active programme that is well on the way. They are cautious in their announcements but I would expect it within a decade.
Not a chance! I suppose they could just go to the Science Museum in London and borrow Apollo 10 lunar lander which is there. It really can't be done. What I liked from First Man is that before take off, the astronauts have about 10 people making sure their spacesuit is on correctly, when they got to the moon in the tiniest of spaces they had to put on their spacesuit themselves. Remember if they made a mistake they would die.
I think you have invented an entirely new kind of logical fallacy. If people don't do stuff it is not always because they can't do it, it's because they can't be arsed to do it.
I must have missed something obvious, but I can't for the life of me see how extending the transition period for a year makes a ha'pence of difference to resolving the artificial obstacle of the Irish backstop, which is supposed to be the stumbling block.
It is solipsism on a national level thinking that things will come round to us eventually.
It was the EU's suggestion, wasn't it?
They presumably are at their wits end and wondered if it would help the PM.
It would help the PM, as well as themselves and the European economy, if they'd stop faffing around and start actually negotiating the future relationship, rather than stalling on totally artificial obstacles.
The problem is that the people the Brussels types speak to are in the same boat as the Duke of Windsor was with Hitler, egging him on to bomb the country to break the will of the nation. The likes of Robbins, Blair, Clegg who are most friendly with the commission are playing that game. They want the EU to create barriers to try and force a second vote or the abandonment of leaving without a vote.
I must have missed something obvious, but I can't for the life of me see how extending the transition period for a year makes a ha'pence of difference to resolving the artificial obstacle of the Irish backstop, which is supposed to be the stumbling block.
Quite. As someone else has said, it's just another year of doubt and uncertainty, with the same pain at the end anyway. It's worse.
No Deal is better than this.
If we compare Brexit to coming off heroin (and there are odd parallels, and I was once a heroin addict) then this transition period is like going onto methadone, which makes you slightly dopey and slow and addicted to methadone, but is supposedly good, because it gets you off heroin.
However you lose the rush and fun of heroin, and you do not regain the clarity and drive of being totally clean. And then you have to quit methadone anyway, at the end, and that's not fun.
So TMay wants to move us from heroin to methadone, and she's now proposed we stay on methadone an extra year, as if that's a good thing. Why?
I am beginning to think we have to do this cold turkey. Lock ourselves indoors with a load of Valium, booze, a puke bucket, some porn and a couple of DVD box sets, and just sweat out the pain and anguish. It will hurt, a lot, but you get clean quick, and life can start again much faster.
I think we will end up in a near permanent transition, in the Single Market and Customs Union for years but still technically outside the EU but for most purposes still inside it and only the whole UK staying in the Single Market and Customs Union will avoid a hard border in Ireland and appease the DUP.
There is now no majority in Parliament for anything else
There is no majority for the NI backstop. You keep ignoring that.
To be a bit more explicit, I can see why business leaders would want a longer transition, and that there could be an argument for an extra transition year if it is thought that the time is needed to finalise the exact details of a trade deal. However, we haven't even started discussing those details, and they aren't the stumbling block at the moment, so it's bizarre to put this forward as some kind of way forward on the backstop issue.
A50 2 years to agree Transition 1. Transition 1 three years to agree Transition 2 (SM+CU). Transition 2 indeterminate number of years to agree Final State. 10 years or so if it's Canada (which I doubt).
We could short circuit it by by going for CU+SM as final state instead of Transition 2. But we need to get the consensus on that now.
As a child of the 60s the space race and Apollo programme are indelibly etched in my memories. Looking forward to some full-on nostalgia about what is surely a pinnacle of himan achievement
Only four of the twelve who walked on the moon are still alive.
Its entirely possible that at some point there will be no living human who went there.
Something which would have seemed unimaginable fifty years ago baring some subsequent civilisation ending event.
China has an active manned lunar landing programme. Nominally they are aiming for 2036 but I would expect them to bring that date in drastically. The programme seems to be going well and they have a lot of the technology in place.
Man will never go back to the moon, despite the amazing advances in technology over the past 50 years the technology does not exist to get a man to the moon. In 1960 America had never even sent a man into space, yet just 9 years later they landed men on the moon. Just think of the madness of where we are now, even China with all their technology and money can't do it, yet 50 years ago America with no technology could. I have seen First Man , a really good film, what struck me was the lunar lander, it was basically a tin can with silver foil wrapped round it. I really find it hard to believe that something that was possible in 1969 is simply not possible any more.
China will send people to the moon. They have an active programme that is well on the way. They are cautious in their announcements but I would expect it within a decade.
Not a chance! I suppose they could just go to the Science Museum in London and borrow Apollo 10 lunar lander which is there. It really can't be done. What I liked from First Man is that before take off, the astronauts have about 10 people making sure their spacesuit is on correctly, when they got to the moon in the tiniest of spaces they had to put on their spacesuit themselves. Remember if they made a mistake they would die.
I think you have invented an entirely new kind of logical fallacy. If people don't do stuff it is not always because they can't do it, it's because they can't be arsed to do it.
I must have missed something obvious, but I can't for the life of me see how extending the transition period for a year makes a ha'pence of difference to resolving the artificial obstacle of the Irish backstop, which is supposed to be the stumbling block.
Quite. As someone else has said, it's just another year of doubt and uncertainty, with the same pain at the end anyway. It's worse.
No Deal is better than this.
If we compare Brexit to coming off heroin (and there are odd parallels, and I was once a heroin addict) then this transition period is like going onto methadone, which makes you slightly dopey and slow and addicted to methadone, but is supposedly good, because it gets you off heroin.
However you lose the rush and fun of heroin, and you do not regain the clarity and drive of being totally clean. And then you have to quit methadone anyway, at the end, and that's not fun.
So TMay wants to move us from heroin to methadone, and she's now proposed we stay on methadone an extra year, as if that's a good thing. Why?
I am beginning to think we have to do this cold turkey. Lock ourselves indoors with a load of Valium, booze, a puke bucket, some porn and a couple of DVD box sets, and just sweat out the pain and anguish. It will hurt, a lot, but you get clean quick, and life can start again much faster.
I think we will end up in a near permanent transition, in the Single Market and Customs Union for years but still technically outside the EU but for most purposes still inside it and only the whole UK staying in the Single Market and Customs Union will avoid a hard border in Ireland and appease the DUP.
There is now no majority in Parliament for anything else
There is no majority for the NI backstop. You keep ignoring that.
Except there is, there is a majority for the SM and CU and there is a majority for keeping NI in the SM and CU, a majority of Labour MPs back that, all LD, SNP, PC and Green MPs back that, about 40 Tory MPs back that over No Deal and even the DUP might accept that if the UK stays in the SM and CU too which in effect it will, probably indefinitely.
In fact May is heading towards that too and while the ERG will oppose it a majority of Tory MPs may back it, most Tory MPs voted Remain after all. May will give a vague promise of a technical solution to end the Irish backstop and a FTA 'in a galaxy far, far away' in reality it could be SM and CU limbo in perpetuity
To be a bit more explicit, I can see why business leaders would want a longer transition, and that there could be an argument for an extra transition year if it is thought that the time is needed to finalise the exact details of a trade deal. However, we haven't even started discussing those details, and they aren't the stumbling block at the moment, so it's bizarre to put this forward as some kind of way forward on the backstop issue.
The backstop comes into force at the end of the transition period if a final trade deal that solves the Irish border problem has not been completed.
Clearly, if there is any chance that a final trade deal would avoid the need for the backstop to come into effect, then providing more time for one to be negotiated makes the use of the backstop less likely.
What it doesn't do is address the (valid/paranoid) concerns of some that a backstop with no end date is an attempt to annex Northern Ireland. Perhaps some concerns are too (crazy/intractable) to address.
But the EU want NI in SMCU. If they have that at the outset there’s no need for them to negotiate.
So one year, or two, or three, or twenty are pointless.
I thought Prosecco sales in London meant that the EU would beg for a trade deal with Britain?
Even though that was hyperbole the EU still has wider interests in doing a long-term trade deal with Britain.
Only four of the twelve who walked on the moon are still alive.
Its entirely possible that at some point there will be no living human who went there.
Something which would have seemed unimaginable fifty years ago baring some subsequent civilisation ending event.
China has an active manned lunar landing programme. Nominally they are aiming for 2036 but I would expect them to bring that date in drastically. The programme seems to be going well and they have a lot of the technology in place.
Man will never go back to the moon, despite the amazing advances in technology over the past 50 years the technology does not exist to get a man to the moon. In 1960 America had never even sent a man into space, yet just 9 years later they landed men on the moon. Just think of the madness of where we are now, even China with all their technology and money can't do it, yet 50 years ago America with no technology could. I have seen First Man , a really good film, what struck me was the lunar lander, it was basically a tin can with silver foil wrapped round it. I really find it hard to believe that something that was possible in 1969 is simply not possible any more.
Of course it can be done - but consider that at the height of the Apollo program, it was costing the US the equivalent of $80bn a year. Give SpaceX that kind of cash, and they’d be there in 3 years, tops.
It really can't. The last time a human left the earth's orbit was in 1972, thing about that, for whatever reason in the last 46 years not a single human has left the earth's orbit. If it could be done now then China would have done it ,
Why would they? It could be done but for what purpose. Our voyages into space have become less so that we can and more for a mission. The proposals for future moon missions aren't just to go to the moon for the sake of it, it is either as a stepping stone to Mars or for human habitation. We could swiftly return to the moon if that was all we were trying to achieve but that doesn't give any meaningful returns on investment.
When China landed the moon rover it was headline news all over the world, the vast majority of people in this world were not alive in 1969, if China could do it now it would have an even bigger impact than Armstrong did in 1969 due to the IT and AV technology that exists these day. In 1969 Most people in the world did not have a TV. If China could do it they would of by now. It will never happen .
If 400,000 Brits are applying for residency in France it suggests that estimates of the number of UK citizens living in the EU27 are way too low.
I suspect that many are seasonal residents, rather than permanent. It is quite usual for retired folk to winter abroad, but maintain residence here too.
On that subject, anyone know what Tyson's up to these days? Haven't seen him on the threads in a while.
As is @Richard_Tyndall . I wonder if there's a half-life of contributors, with people just wandering off after awhile.
To be a bit more explicit, I can see why business leaders would want a longer transition, and that there could be an argument for an extra transition year if it is thought that the time is needed to finalise the exact details of a trade deal. However, we haven't even started discussing those details, and they aren't the stumbling block at the moment, so it's bizarre to put this forward as some kind of way forward on the backstop issue.
The backstop comes into force at the end of the transition period if a final trade deal that solves the Irish border problem has not been completed.
Clearly, if there is any chance that a final trade deal would avoid the need for the backstop to come into effect, then providing more time for one to be negotiated makes the use of the backstop less likely.
What it doesn't do is address the (valid/paranoid) concerns of some that a backstop with no end date is an attempt to annex Northern Ireland. Perhaps some concerns are too (crazy/intractable) to address.
But the EU want NI in SMCU. If they have that at the outset there’s no need for them to negotiate.
So one year, or two, or three, or twenty are pointless.
I thought Prosecco sales in London meant that the EU would beg for a trade deal with Britain?
Even though that was hyperbole the EU still has wider interests in doing a long-term trade deal with Britain.
Yes indeed. But trust has gone between the two sides. So that’s why the backstop is an issue.
1) She's an idiot/exhausted/given up caring and has no idea what she's proposed, why, and who it will enrage. 2) She knows that this will achieve nothing, but it's something to say, and kicking the can down the road is all she has left, however little sense it makes. 3) This is a ploy to force her party to VONC her, so she can win it, then capitulate totally to the EU before Christmas. 4) The EU is toying with her, and at this point she's too weak and terrified to even bother arguing 5) We're in the Full Retard timeline
My money is on two. I don't doubt she is frustrated enough to not mind if there is a VONC, but I don't think she'd deliberately provoke on for the reason she could not be sure how badly she would provoke all the other MPs to the point she would not win it.
I still think there's a strategy of sorts, but a kind of strategy that a tactician thinks up. It's to
1. Persuade everyone that No Deal would be a catastrophe. Plan lorry parks on motorways, urge the NHS to stockpile medicine, ruminate about food shortages.
2. Keep talking doggedly and earn respect for trying. Explore numerous avenues and make it known you've tried but sadly they don't work.
3. Insist there will only be two choices: No Deal and whatever is agreed. Firmly rule out any kind of amendments.
4. At the very last moment, agree customs union with an unspecific but solemn, 28-nation commitment to move on from it as soon as possible.
It'll probably work, in my opinion, and result in something rather like membership though with less influence, indefinitely.
There is no majority for the NI backstop. You keep ignoring that.
There's no majority for Chequers+backstops-all-the-way-down.
There might be a majority for the UK to join the EEA+CU indefinitely though. There is a deal May could do with Labour and the SNP, if she wanted it.
Means FOM
Yes.
Though if we do go into transition, with or without a backstop on 29 March, a #peoplesvote becomes obselete. Those Remainers then are likely to back EEA, and likely to command a majority in the country.
There is no majority for the NI backstop. You keep ignoring that.
There's no majority for Chequers+backstops-all-the-way-down.
There might be a majority for the UK to join the EEA+CU indefinitely though. There is a deal May could do with Labour and the SNP, if she wanted it.
I don't think there's a majority for anything that includes free movement of people. Too many Labour MPs are opposed.
I still think free movement is fudgable. I mean, we won't know till we try. But we have to make it into the EEA+CU first.
So why did they turn Cameron down nigh on flat on it? They could’ve avoided all of this by saying ok to an emergency brake. They didn’t. They see it as existential,
With real compromise on FOM a world of possible opportunity would open. But they haven’t yet, so why would they now?
I must have missed something obvious, but I can't for the life of me see how extending the transition period for a year makes a ha'pence of difference to resolving the artificial obstacle of the Irish backstop, which is supposed to be the stumbling block.
It is solipsism on a national level thinking that things will come round to us eventually.
It was the EU's suggestion, wasn't it?
They presumably are at their wits end and wondered if it would help the PM.
People seem to have wildly different views on their motivations in that sphere, in the some insist the EU are suggesting various thinks to help her, others think they are trying to box her in so she has to cave in and offer referendums or go for a new GE.
I see little evidence to assume the EU27 are in any mood at all to take pity on May. Why would they?
They're in no mood to take pity on TMay, but they are definitely minded to avoid No Deal. It's only a handful of Federalist nutters who want that outcome (to punish Britain)
Read the German/Dutch press etc, and it is full of warnings that No Deal would be very bad for the EU, even as it is calamitous for Britain and Ireland.
All the politicians in Europe are focussed on this, even if they pretend they don't care. They do care. A lot. Britain constitutes 15% of the EU's GDP, and is its biggest trading partner, and is its largest financial centre and home to its best universities, plus 3m Europeans, and much of its soft power, etc.
The idea the EU can just shrug off a Crash Brexit is for the birds.
Somehow the EU has to subtly walk back from its Irish commitment. Or No Deal it is, I think.
Well the vast majority of his colleagues disagreed with him. He at least voted against implementing A50 IIRC, he can be consistent that he was not prepared to risk just this very situation, but those who did vote for A50 were implicitly accepting this could happen. Of course legally they could decide this specific outcome is not worth it and cancel it all, but they cannot do so for the same reasons Clarke believes it should be, since most of them did accept that daft opinion poll was how it should have been decided.
- Brexiteers who don’t want a longer transition - Remainers who thought the meaningful vote would allow them to stop Brexit.
That’s probably 48, y’know.
So what, even with 48 there are nowhere near enough MPs to get the 160 needed to topple May, the ERG's entire membership is barely half that.
May is actually the perfect Zombie PM for the Zombie Brexit/EU limbo we are now entering and will be in for years
I guess you could argue that undeath is a form of strong and stable..?
'A strong and stable zombie PM, leading a strong and stable zombie government on the road to nowhere opposed by Worzel Gummidge as Leader of the Opposition'
Well he did once famously say that in time Westminster would become as relevant as a local council debating chamber as we transfer all our power to the EU....
There is no majority for the NI backstop. You keep ignoring that.
There's no majority for Chequers+backstops-all-the-way-down.
There might be a majority for the UK to join the EEA+CU indefinitely though. There is a deal May could do with Labour and the SNP, if she wanted it.
I don't think there's a majority for anything that includes free movement of people. Too many Labour MPs are opposed.
I still think free movement is fudgable. I mean, we won't know till we try. But we have to make it into the EEA+CU first.
It's not fudgeable. In its entirety history the EU has never compromised on free movement, not even by a single word. It is a fundamental law of the EU and single market. Unless the EU compromises first and puts pen to paper that says the UK can have the SM+CU but no free movement or deny any and all benefits to new EU arrivals there's literally no chance of it happening. As you say, they'll just bank the concession and move on.
There's no solution to Northern Ireland whilst the DUP are in Government. In all probability that situation ends in 2022, whoever wins the GE (Their influence is only present 308-318 Tory MPs). Once they're out the way, Northern Ireland can be sold down the river or we rejoin perhaps if it is Labour/Corbyn + Lib Dems But not before.
I must have missed something obvious, but I can't for the life of me see how extending the transition period for a year makes a ha'pence of difference to resolving the artificial obstacle of the Irish backstop, which is supposed to be the stumbling block.
It is solipsism on a national level thinking that things will come round to us eventually.
It was the EU's suggestion, wasn't it?
They presumably are at their wits end and wondered if it would help the PM.
People seem to have wildly different views on their motivations in that sphere, in the some insist the EU are suggesting various thinks to help her, others think they are trying to box her in so she has to cave in and offer referendums or go for a new GE.
I see little evidence to assume the EU27 are in any mood at all to take pity on May. Why would they?
They're in no mood to take pity on TMay, but they are definitely minded to avoid No Deal.
Somehow the EU has to subtly walk back from its Irish commitment. Or No Deal it is, I think.
Well, yes. They don't *want* a no deal, but they're not prepared to lift a finger to stop it if it means giving ground on the NI backstop or the four freedoms.
In the meantime, they're happy to continue running down the clock, and toying with May.
If 400,000 Brits are applying for residency in France it suggests that estimates of the number of UK citizens living in the EU27 are way too low.
I suspect that many are seasonal residents, rather than permanent. It is quite usual for retired folk to winter abroad, but maintain residence here too.
On that subject, anyone know what Tyson's up to these days? Haven't seen him on the threads in a while.
As is @Richard_Tyndall . I wonder if there's a half-life of contributors, with people just wandering off after awhile.
tyson popped up a week or two back, seemed OK.
Good to know. We do have some ill/elderly contributors so it's nice to see everybody is OK, or at least not noticeably worse.
I think we are going to see the end of May in the next couple of weeks.
The truth is that the EU are not engaging with her because they say she doesn't know what she wants - by which they means she keeps talking about Chequers which is a non starter so they just assume she is stalling.
This is why the Tories are screaming at her to switch to CETA. That solves all the problems except the backstop. At that point there is a real decision for the EU to make - right now they don't see any endgame on trade so they have no incentive to deal.
The remainers see all this through the prism of May getting Parliament to reverse Brexit or call another referendum. I doubt there are more than a few in the Cabinet who think this is the endgame. The vast majority know it will destroy the party and destroy all their careers - they will all be branded as liars forever. They either want a deal, which May cannot now deliver, or they need to prepare for No Deal, which is not something May can lead.
I am sure the Cabinet know the truth - the backstop is what has killed the negotiations and the backstop was May's decision. She can't get away from it and she cannot solve it. It was the biggest misjudgement imaginable and it has destroyed her.
The negotiations are going nowhere. They have not even discussed a draft of the political declaration. There is no solution to the border. Nothing is going to change. Tories are loyal right up until they are not. Everyone is fed up of kicking this can down the road. The road ran out for May tonight.
There is no majority for the NI backstop. You keep ignoring that.
There's no majority for Chequers+backstops-all-the-way-down.
There might be a majority for the UK to join the EEA+CU indefinitely though. There is a deal May could do with Labour and the SNP, if she wanted it.
I don't think there's a majority for anything that includes free movement of people. Too many Labour MPs are opposed.
I still think free movement is fudgable. I mean, we won't know till we try. But we have to make it into the EEA+CU first.
So why did they turn Cameron down nigh on flat on it? They could’ve avoided all of this by saying ok to an emergency brake. They didn’t. They see it as existential,
With real compromise on FOM a world of possible opportunity would open. But they haven’t yet, so why would they now?
We could have controlled FOM within the EU had Blair imposed transition controls on free movement from the new accession nations in 2004, in any case there has been a net fall in Eastern European migration to the UK since the Leave vote anyway
There is no majority for the NI backstop. You keep ignoring that.
There's no majority for Chequers+backstops-all-the-way-down.
There might be a majority for the UK to join the EEA+CU indefinitely though. There is a deal May could do with Labour and the SNP, if she wanted it.
Means FOM
Yes.
Though if we do go into transition, with or without a backstop on 29 March, a #peoplesvote becomes obselete. Those Remainers then are likely to back EEA, and likely to command a majority in the country.
There is no majority for the NI backstop. You keep ignoring that.
There's no majority for Chequers+backstops-all-the-way-down.
There might be a majority for the UK to join the EEA+CU indefinitely though. There is a deal May could do with Labour and the SNP, if she wanted it.
Means FOM
Yes.
Though if we do go into transition, with or without a backstop on 29 March, a #peoplesvote becomes obselete. Those Remainers then are likely to back EEA, and likely to command a majority in the country.
FOM may well be the price of Brexit.
Except EEA/EFTA excludes the Customs Union and we would have to stay in the Single Market and Customs Union to avoid a hard border in Ireland
There is no majority for the NI backstop. You keep ignoring that.
There's no majority for Chequers+backstops-all-the-way-down.
There might be a majority for the UK to join the EEA+CU indefinitely though. There is a deal May could do with Labour and the SNP, if she wanted it.
Means FOM
Yes.
Though if we do go into transition, with or without a backstop on 29 March, a #peoplesvote becomes obselete. Those Remainers then are likely to back EEA, and likely to command a majority in the country.
There is no majority for the NI backstop. You keep ignoring that.
There's no majority for Chequers+backstops-all-the-way-down.
There might be a majority for the UK to join the EEA+CU indefinitely though. There is a deal May could do with Labour and the SNP, if she wanted it.
Means FOM
Yes.
Though if we do go into transition, with or without a backstop on 29 March, a #peoplesvote becomes obselete. Those Remainers then are likely to back EEA, and likely to command a majority in the country.
They're in no mood to take pity on TMay, but they are definitely minded to avoid No Deal. It's only a handful of Federalist nutters who want that outcome (to punish Britain)
Read the German/Dutch press etc, and it is full of warnings that No Deal would be very bad for the EU, even as it is calamitous for Britain and Ireland.
All the politicians in Europe are focussed on this, even if they pretend they don't care. They do care. A lot. Britain constitutes 15% of the EU's GDP, and is its biggest trading partner, and is its largest financial centre and home to its best universities, plus 3m Europeans, and much of its soft power, etc.
The idea the EU can just shrug off a Crash Brexit is for the birds.
Somehow the EU has to subtly walk back from its Irish commitment. Or No Deal it is, I think.
If the EU is to walk back on something it has to be the Irish issue, but I don't think they are immune from the momentum of their own rhetoric anymore than we are, and I think they will struggle to walk back from it even if they do want to. And personally I do doubt it. Not that they want no deal, but plenty of people on both sides claim to not want no deal, but their actions in a willingness to very seriously risk no deal demonstrate their words, even if sincere, are hollow on that front. If I say I am against something but make no effort to avoid it, I may as well be in support of it, even if I do not think I am.
And they do have plenty of people who are telling them no deal is no worry for them, we see such people on here all the time. They absolutely should care about a deal, they are right to know a big external power is something it is better to have a deal with than no deal. But despite the difficulty of existing the EU already having been made very clear, so any dissuasion to others has been made, they still seem to be prioritising that we do not appear to get any wins (despite a negotiation requiring each side getting something, even if not in equal measure) and trusting May can deliver them that, which she cannot.
So really, they may well be minded to avoid no deal, but that does not seem to be enough. What a strange situation it will be where the outcome is not anything more than a handful of people wanted.
There is no majority for the NI backstop. You keep ignoring that.
There's no majority for Chequers+backstops-all-the-way-down.
There might be a majority for the UK to join the EEA+CU indefinitely though. There is a deal May could do with Labour and the SNP, if she wanted it.
I don't think there's a majority for anything that includes free movement of people. Too many Labour MPs are opposed.
I still think free movement is fudgable. I mean, we won't know till we try. But we have to make it into the EEA+CU first.
So why did they turn Cameron down nigh on flat on it? They could’ve avoided all of this by saying ok to an emergency brake. They didn’t. They see it as existential,
With real compromise on FOM a world of possible opportunity would open. But they haven’t yet, so why would they now?
We could have controlled FOM within the EU had Blair imposed transition controls on free movement from the new accession nations in 2004, in any case there has been a net fall in Eastern European migration to the UK since the Leave vote anyway
There is no majority for the NI backstop. You keep ignoring that.
There's no majority for Chequers+backstops-all-the-way-down.
There might be a majority for the UK to join the EEA+CU indefinitely though. There is a deal May could do with Labour and the SNP, if she wanted it.
Means FOM
Yes.
Though if we do go into transition, with or without a backstop on 29 March, a #peoplesvote becomes obselete. Those Remainers then are likely to back EEA, and likely to command a majority in the country.
FOM may well be the price of Brexit.
So the divide won’t end then.
Gammons gonna gammon, I guess.
Farage will likely be back as UKIP leader or some new Bannon/Banks party within a year crying 'betrayal'. He was certainly scathing of May this evening
There is no majority for the NI backstop. You keep ignoring that.
There's no majority for Chequers+backstops-all-the-way-down.
There might be a majority for the UK to join the EEA+CU indefinitely though. There is a deal May could do with Labour and the SNP, if she wanted it.
Means FOM
Yes.
Though if we do go into transition, with or without a backstop on 29 March, a #peoplesvote becomes obselete. Those Remainers then are likely to back EEA, and likely to command a majority in the country.
FOM may well be the price of Brexit.
Except EEA/EFTA excludes the Customs Union and we would have to stay in the Single Market and Customs Union to avoid a hard border in Ireland
Which means a new mixed competency treaty from scratch that could be vetoed by any Parliament (inc Wallonia) and would take years to agree. In the meantime, the NI backstop. Julian Smith told the Cabinet that there was no way the NI backstop would get through the Commons. I know you just want to ignore that, but there are not 100 MPs who would vote for it. If the SM+CU treaty falls apart, it would partition the UK and MPs will never, ever vote for it.
There's no solution to Northern Ireland whilst the DUP are in Government. In all probability that situation ends in 2022, whoever wins the GE (Their influence is only present 308-318 Tory MPs). Once they're out the way, Northern Ireland can be sold down the river or we rejoin perhaps if it is Labour/Corbyn + Lib Dems But not before.
Has there been much GB polling on an "Irish Sea Border"?
My hunch is that not only would people not object to it much, many (perhaps Leave voters especially) would think it eminent commonsense to have strong borders around an island, regardless of whether Northern Ireland is technically the same country.
There's no solution to Northern Ireland whilst the DUP are in Government. In all probability that situation ends in 2022, whoever wins the GE (Their influence is only present 308-318 Tory MPs). Once they're out the way, Northern Ireland can be sold down the river or we rejoin perhaps if it is Labour/Corbyn + Lib Dems But not before.
Has there been much GB polling on an "Irish Sea Border"?
My hunch is that not only would people not object to it much, many (perhaps Leave voters especially) would think it eminent commonsense to have strong borders around an island, regardless of whether Northern Ireland is technically the same country.
Personally I think the DUP are quite right, but the reality is no-one outside of NI unionists will give a hoot.
There is no majority for the NI backstop. You keep ignoring that.
There's no majority for Chequers+backstops-all-the-way-down.
There might be a majority for the UK to join the EEA+CU indefinitely though. There is a deal May could do with Labour and the SNP, if she wanted it.
Means FOM
Yes.
Though if we do go into transition, with or without a backstop on 29 March, a #peoplesvote becomes obselete. Those Remainers then are likely to back EEA, and likely to command a majority in the country.
FOM may well be the price of Brexit.
So the divide won’t end then.
No, I don't think it will. Being in or out of the EU is a cultural issue, concerning how we see Britain's place in the world.
I see that place as part of continental european structures, and through that the wider world of international co-operation to tackle the human, societal, economic, environmental and cultural issues of the day. A Europe without Britain is a diminished place, and viceversa. Brexit cuts us off from our family.
There is no majority for the NI backstop. You keep ignoring that.
There's no majority for Chequers+backstops-all-the-way-down.
There might be a majority for the UK to join the EEA+CU indefinitely though. There is a deal May could do with Labour and the SNP, if she wanted it.
Means FOM
Yes.
Though if we do go into transition, with or without a backstop on 29 March, a #peoplesvote becomes obselete. Those Remainers then are likely to back EEA, and likely to command a majority in the country.
FOM may well be the price of Brexit.
Except EEA/EFTA excludes the Customs Union and we would have to stay in the Single Market and Customs Union to avoid a hard border in Ireland
Which means a new mixed competency treaty from scratch that could be vetoed by any Parliament (inc Wallonia) and would take years to agree. In the meantime, the NI backstop. Julian Smith told the Cabinet that there was no way the NI backstop would get through the Commons. I know you just want to ignore that, but there are not 100 MPs who would vote for it. If the SM+CU treaty falls apart, it would partition the UK and MPs will never, ever vote for it.
Which we would have given we are now going to be in a transition period until the end of 2021 anyway and that transition period will likely keep getting extended for year after year until any new competency treaty is agreed.
In the meantime we would still be in the SM and CU, and NI staying in the SM and CU until a technical solution is found to the Irish border will have been agreed as the backstop.
Julian Smith is an ideological Brexiteer who only deals with Tory MPs, in reality there is a comfortable majority in the Commons for SM +CU which only the ERG and Corbyn for political tactics reasons would really oppose (remember most Tory MPs voted Remain). I know you want to ignore that with your No Deal obsession, in reality barely 100 MPs would vote for a No Deal Brexit and almost all of them from the ERG. MPs will of course vote for SM and CU rather than crash the economy with No Deal Brexit and risk NI and Scotland voting to leave the UK
There is no majority for the NI backstop. You keep ignoring that.
There's no majority for Chequers+backstops-all-the-way-down.
There might be a majority for the UK to join the EEA+CU indefinitely though. There is a deal May could do with Labour and the SNP, if she wanted it.
Means FOM
Yes.
Though if we do go into transition, with or without a backstop on 29 March, a #peoplesvote becomes obselete. Those Remainers then are likely to back EEA, and likely to command a majority in the country.
FOM may well be the price of Brexit.
Except EEA/EFTA excludes the Customs Union and we would have to stay in the Single Market and Customs Union to avoid a hard border in Ireland
Which means a new mixed competency treaty from scratch that could be vetoed by any Parliament (inc Wallonia) and would take years to agree. In the meantime, the NI backstop. Julian Smith told the Cabinet that there was no way the NI backstop would get through the Commons. I know you just want to ignore that, but there are not 100 MPs who would vote for it. If the SM+CU treaty falls apart, it would partition the UK and MPs will never, ever vote for it.
Which we would have given we are now going to be in a transition period until the end of 2021 anyway and that transition period will likely keep getting extended for year after year until any new competency treaty is agreed.
In the meantime we would still be in the SM and CU, and NI staying in the SM and CU until a technical solution is found to the Irish border will have been agreed as the backstop.
Julian Smith is an ideological Brexiteer who only deals with Tory MPs, in a reality there is a comfortable majority in the Commons for SM +CU which only the ERG and Corbyn for political tactics reasons would really oppose. I know you want to ignore that with your No Deal obsession, in reality barely 100 MPs would vote for a No Deal Brexit and almost all of them from the ERG. MPs will of course vote for SM and CU rather than crash the economy with No Deal Brexit and risk NI and Scotland voting to leave the UK
No vote is required for the no deal Brexit.
Who is going to propose SM and CU.
And how are they going to get around breaking up the Union to do so?
There is no majority for the NI backstop. You keep ignoring that.
There's no majority for Chequers+backstops-all-the-way-down.
There might be a majority for the UK to join the EEA+CU indefinitely though. There is a deal May could do with Labour and the SNP, if she wanted it.
Means FOM
Yes.
Though if we do go into transition, with or without a backstop on 29 March, a #peoplesvote becomes obselete. Those Remainers then are likely to back EEA, and likely to command a majority in the country.
FOM may well be the price of Brexit.
So the divide won’t end then.
No, I don't think it will. Being in or out of the EU is a cultural issue, concerning how we see Britain's place in the world.
I see that place as part of continental european structures, and through that the wider world of international co-operation to tackle the human, societal, economic, environmental and cultural issues of the day. A Europe without Britain is a diminished place, and viceversa. Brexit cuts us off from our family.
There's the divide. I don't see Europe as "family" in the same way as you. I see them as close neighbours and in some cases good friends, and maybe second cousins. They are the regulars in the local pub, people I often like hanging out with, but not people I would necessarily die for. I certainly wouldn't enlist to defend Bulgaria or Romania. Holland or France maybe, depending on the enemy.
If I look for family I look at Canada, Australia, New Zealand, maybe Ireland, and, more distantly, America. I would definitely fight for their freedom.
This is probably genetically true, not just metaphorically.
However I accept that lots of Brits (a minority, but not insignificant) feel very differently, and do see Europe as a family.
Hence the anguish of this divide. I do honestly see the sincere pain in my europhile friends. They feel something precious is being taken from them. I share a bit of it, but not enough to sacrifice my country's freedom.
There is no majority for the NI backstop. You keep ignoring that.
There's no majority for Chequers+backstops-all-the-way-down.
There might be a majority for the UK to join the EEA+CU indefinitely though. There is a deal May could do with Labour and the SNP, if she wanted it.
Means FOM
Yes.
Though if we do go into transition, with or without a backstop on 29 March, a #peoplesvote becomes obselete. Those Remainers then are likely to back EEA, and likely to command a majority in the country.
FOM may well be the price of Brexit.
Except EEA/EFTA excludes the Customs Union and we would have to stay in the Single Market and Customs Union to avoid a hard border in Ireland
Which means a new mixed competency treaty from scratch that could be vetoed by any Parliament (inc Wallonia) and would take years to agree. In the meantime, the NI backstop. Julian Smith told the Cabinet that there was no way the NI backstop would get through the Commons. I know you just want to ignore that, but there are not 100 MPs who would vote for it. If the SM+CU treaty falls apart, it would partition the UK and MPs will never, ever vote for it.
Which we would have given we are cotland voting to leave the UK
No vote is required for the no deal Brexit.
Who is going to propose SM and CU.
And how are they going to get around breaking up the Union to do so?
There will be a vote as May has made clear she will refer to Parliament even if No Deal.
All the evidence tonight is May is extending the transition period (which will be SM +CU anyway for as long as it lasts) for another year and that will likely end up being indefinite the way things are going with the SM +CU agreed as the backstop for NI, with May making a vague promise that ultimately there will be a technical solution to the border.
It would of course only be No Deal that breaks up the Union, quite possibly leading both Scotland and NI to vote for independence. Indefinite SM +CU limbo for the whole UK in an everlasting transition period will keep the Union together
There is no majority for the NI backstop. You keep ignoring that.
There's no majority for Chequers+backstops-all-the-way-down.
There might be a majority for the UK to join the EEA+CU indefinitely though. There is a deal May could do with Labour and the SNP, if she wanted it.
Means FOM
Yes.
Though if we do go into transition, with or without a backstop on 29 March, a #peoplesvote becomes obselete. Those Remainers then are likely to back EEA, and likely to command a majority in the country.
FOM may well be the price of Brexit.
Except EEA/EFTA excludes the Customs Union and we would have to stay in the Single Market and Customs Union to avoid a hard border in Ireland
Which means a new mMPs will never, ever vote for it.
Which we would have given we are cotland voting to leave the UK
No vote is required for the no deal Brexit.
Who is going to propose SM and CU.
And how are they going to get around breaking up the Union to do so?
There will be a vote as May has made clear she will refer to Parliament even if No Deal.
Asnip
It would of course only be No Deal that breaks up the Union, quite possibly leading both Scotland and NI to vote for independence. Indefinite SM +CU limbo for the whole UK in an everlasting transition period will keep the Union together
No, it won't pass. It turns us into a perpetual colony, a feudal province, with no say in the rules, and having to take EU diktats without dissent. And we have no say in trade deals made in our name, and, yet, they will be using our economy as bait. Honest Brits (or English men and women) will not tolerate that. We could perhaps endure this for a year or two, but in perpetuity? Of course not. The Commons will reflect this sentiment.
As Hannan says, Remaining is better than that. Or No Deal.
There has to be a strict time limit on this arrangement. Otherwise the Commons votes it down and it is No Deal (or another referendum).
"Remain is better than that"
It is a race against time before most people realise that this is true. And there is v little left.
Tick tock.
Brexiteers must be terrified. It is all very well spending decades campaigning for something, but to actually almost achieve it and then have the whole golden bowl of honey turn to dust between your fingers must be terrible.
That's where we are with landing on the moon, we could do it in a world of Morris minors, but in a world of Teslas we can't.
We could if we wanted. But we don't. We also lost any economies of scale.
Like steam trains. We could manufacture one today, but it would cost millions.
We did. 60163 Tornado cost about £3,000,000.
China is desperate to get to the moon but simply do not have the technology to do it. Look at NASAs Orion space craft, on their promotional videos they say they are not certain what the effects of the radiation from the Van Allen belts would have on the astronauts. Why don't they know, they sent astronauts through this radiation in the late 69s, early 70s and it apparently had no effect but now they are not sure? These NASA Orion videos are basically saying they have never left the earths orbit before and do not know what will happen. Type in "NASA admits repeatedly that we have never been to the moon" in google. It's a very short video. It's like NASA are wiping Apollo from their history.
OTOH Democrats doing well in New Jersey 11 which has been GOP since 1985.
Yes it looks like they're going to just edge the House but it'll probably be rather close for comfort. They ought to be winning it much more easily. Something like 225 to 210 seems the most likely result at the moment.
There is no majority for the NI backstop. You keep ignoring that.
There's no majority for Chequers+backstops-all-the-way-down.
There might be a majority for the UK to join the EEA+CU indefinitely though. There is a deal May could do with Labour and the SNP, if she wanted it.
Means FOM
Yes.
Though if we do go into transition, with or without a backstop on 29 March, a #peoplesvote becomes obselete. Those Remainers then are likely to back EEA, and likely to command a majority in the country.
FOM may well be the price of Brexit.
Except EEA/EFTA excludes the Customs Union and we would have to stay in the Single Market and Customs Union to avoid a hard border in Ireland
Which means a new mMPs will never, ever vote for it.
Which we would have given we are cotland voting to leave the UK
No vote is required for the no deal Brexit.
Who is going to propose SM and CU.
And how are they going to get around breaking up the Union to do so?
There will be a vote as May has made clear she will refer to Parliament even if No Deal.
All the evidence tonight is May is extendingion together
No, it won't pass. It turns us into a perpetual colony, a feudal province, with no say in the rules, and having to take EU diktats without dissent. And we have no say in trade deals made in our name, and, yet, they will be using our economy as bait. Honest Brits (or English men and women) will not tolerate that. We could perhaps endure this for a year or two, but in perpetuity? Of course not. The Commons will reflect this sentiment.
As Hannan says, Remaining is better than that. Or No Deal.
There has to be a strict time limit on this arrangement. Otherwise the Commons votes it down and it is No Deal (or another referendum).
There is no majority in the Commons for either accepting No Deal or for EUref2. There is a majority for kicking the issue into the long grass with SM and CU transition period and backstop
May will give a vague form of carefully crafted civil servant wordage about when a technical solution will be found for the Irish border without giving a specific date but SM and CU will be the backstop and the fate of the UK for years to come in an everlasting transition period
The only reason to extend the transition is if the British government has a realistic end game in sight. There’s no evidence that this is true. @archer101au is totally right; the backstop is the original sin that cannot be made good. The Commons will not pass a deal that could result in NI being economically annexed by the EU.
May should declare for no deal, or resign. We really need to stop mucking about.
There is no majority for the NI backstop. You keep ignoring that.
There's no majority for Chequers+backstops-all-the-way-down.
There might be a majority for the UK to join the EEA+CU indefinitely though. There is a deal May could do with Labour and the SNP, if she wanted it.
Means FOM
Yes.
Though if we do go into transition, with or without a backstop on 29 March, a #peoplesvote becomes obselete. Those Remainers then are likely to back EEA, and likely to command a majority in the country.
FOM may well be the price of Brexit.
Except EEA/EFTA excludes the Customs Union and we would have to stay in the Single Market and Customs Union to avoid a hard border in Ireland
Which means a new mMPs will never, ever vote for it.
Which we would have given we are cotland voting to leave the UK
No vote is required for the no deal Brexit.
Who is going to propose SM and CU.
And how are they going to get around breaking up the Union to do so?
There will be a vote as May has made clear she will refer to Parliament even if No Deal.
All the evidence tonight is May is extendingion together
No, it won't pass. It turns us into a perpetual colony, a feudal province, with no say in the rules, and having to take EU diktats without dissent. And we have no say in trade deals made in our name, and, yet, they will be using our economy as bait. Honest Brits (or English men and women) will not tolerate that. We could perhaps endure this for a year or two, but in perpetuity? Of course not. The Commons will reflect this sentiment.
As Hannan says, Remaining is better than that. Or No Deal.
There has to be a strict time limit on this arrangement. Otherwise the Commons votes it down and it is No Deal (or another referendum).
There is no majority in the Commons for either accepting No Deal or for EUref2. There is a majority for kicking the issue into the long grass with SM and CU transition period and backstop
May will give a vague form of carefully crafted civil servant wordage about when a technical solution will be found for the Irish border without giving a specific date but SM and CU will be the backstop and the fate of the UK for years to come in an everlasting transition period
The backstop won’t pass Parliament.
How many times do you need to be told? And by whom?
1) She's an idiot/exhausted/given up caring and has no idea what she's proposed, why, and who it will enrage. 2) She knows that this will achieve nothing, but it's something to say, and kicking the can down the road is all she has left, however little sense it makes. 3) This is a ploy to force her party to VONC her, so she can win it, then capitulate totally to the EU before Christmas. 4) The EU is toying with her, and at this point she's too weak and terrified to even bother arguing 5) We're in the Full Retard timeline
My money is on two. I don't doubt she is frustrated enough to not mind if there is a VONC, but I don't think she'd deliberately provoke on for the reason she could not be sure how badly she would provoke all the other MPs to the point she would not win it.
I still think there's a strategy of sorts, but a kind of strategy that a tactician thinks up. It's to
1. Persuade everyone that No Deal would be a catastrophe. Plan lorry parks on motorways, urge the NHS to stockpile medicine, ruminate about food shortages.
2. Keep talking doggedly and earn respect for trying. Explore numerous avenues and make it known you've tried but sadly they don't work.
3. Insist there will only be two choices: No Deal and whatever is agreed. Firmly rule out any kind of amendments.
4. At the very last moment, agree customs union with an unspecific but solemn, 28-nation commitment to move on from it as soon as possible.
It'll probably work, in my opinion, and result in something rather like membership though with less influence, indefinitely.
Indeed. But then aren't both sides of the divide justified in asking what was the bloody point?
The only reason to extend the transition is if the British government has a realistic end game in sight. There’s no evidence that this is true. @archer101au is totally right; the backstop is the original sin that cannot be made good. The Commons will not pass a deal that could result in NI being economically annexed by the EU.
May should declare for no deal, or resign. We really need to stop mucking about.
I have a feeling this extension will be the final straw and an announcement from Brady that he has 48 letters will be imminent.
What happens then, who know? Big G says she'll sail through but I'm not so sure... Especially if the Cabinet desert her...
No backing for the backstop, no backing for a longer transition.
I wonder how long before the challenge comes.
Soon. Please. I'm done with her. Kick her out, the stupid Aspergery heifer. She's got a hard job but she makes it worse for herself with every miscalculation.
Enough. Put a Leaver in charge, let them own their instincts. Either it will break the country or it will be an unepected triumph. I suggest someone new and unexpected, a Patel or Raab or whatever.
This perpetual Chamberlain shite from TMay is too too painful.
There is no majority in Parliament at present for a Patel or Raab Brexit, especially with the likes of Soubry and Grieve and Wollaston and Clarke on the Tory side.
May is the perfect zombie PM for a country which is divided down the middle between Remainers and No Deal Leavers neither of whom will let the other win. So it will be zombie Brexit led by a zombie PM!
The only reason to extend the transition is if the British government has a realistic end game in sight. There’s no evidence that this is true. @archer101au is totally right; the backstop is the original sin that cannot be made good. The Commons will not pass a deal that could result in NI being economically annexed by the EU.
May should declare for no deal, or resign. We really need to stop mucking about.
I have a feeling this extension will be the final star and an announcement from Brady that he has 48 letters will be imminent.
What happens then, who know? Big G says she'll sail through but I'm not so sure... Especially if the Cabinet desert her...
Will probably depend on what offer Dominos have on....
There is no majority for the NI backstop. You keep ignoring that.
There's no majority for Chequers+backstops-all-the-way-down.
There might be a majority for the UK to join the EEA+CU indefinitely though. There is a deal May could do with Labour and the SNP, if she wanted it.
Means FOM
Except EEA/EFTA excludes the Customs Union and we would have to stay in the Single Market and Customs Union to avoid a hard border in Ireland
Which means a new mMPs will never, ever vote for it.
Which we would have given we are cotland voting to leave the UK
There will be a vote as May has made clear she will refer to Parliament even if No Deal.
All the evidence tonight is May is extendingion together
No, it won't pass. It turns us into a perpetual colony, a feudal province, with no say in the rules, and having to take EU diktats without dissent. And we have no say in trade deals made in our name, and, yet, they will be using our economy as bait. Honest Brits (or English men and women) will not tolerate that. We could perhaps endure this for a year or two, but in perpetuity? Of course not. The Commons will reflect this sentiment.
As Hannan says, Remaining is better than that. Or No Deal.
There has to be a strict time limit on this arrangement. Otherwise the Commons votes it down and it is No Deal (or another referendum).
There is no majority in the Commons for either accepting No Deal or for EUref2. There is a majority for kicking the issue into the long grass with SM and CU transition period and backstop
May will give a vague form of carefully crafted civil servant wordage about when a technical solution will be found for the Irish border without giving a specific date but SM and CU will be the backstop and the fate of the UK for years to come in an everlasting transition period
‘Carefully crafted civil servant wordage’. Or, to give it its proper name, bollocks.
Our political class needs to realise that real life is not like writing an essay for a tutorial. Sometimes you have to make a decision, rather than set out all the arguments and conclude with ‘it’s complicated’ and split the difference between them. The learned helplessness of our political class is appalling.
There is no majority for the NI backstop. You keep ignoring that.
There's no majority for Chequers+backstops-all-the-way-down.
There might be a majority for the UK to join the EEA+CU indefinitely though. There is a deal May could do with Labour and the SNP, if she wanted it.
Means FOM
Yes.
Though if we do go into transition, with or without a backstop on 29 March, a #peoplesvote becomes obselete. Those Remainers then are likely to back EEA, and likely to command a majority in the country.
FOM may well be the price of Brexit.
Except EEA/EFTA excludes the Customs Union and we would have to stay in the Single Market and Customs Union to avoid a hard border in Ireland
Which means a new mMPs will never, ever vote for it.
Which we would have given we are cotland voting to leave the UK
No vote is required for the no deal Brexit.
Who is going to propose SM and CU.
And how are they going to get around breaking up the Union to do so?
There will be a vote as May has made clear she will refer to Parliament even if No Deal.
Asnip
It would of course only be No Deal that breaks up the Union, quite possibly leading both Scotland and NI to vote for independence. Indefinite SM +CU limbo for the whole UK in an everlasting transition period will keep the Union together
No, it won't pass. It turns us into a perpetual colony, a feudal province, with no say in the rules, and having to take EU diktats without dissent. And we have no say in trade deals made in our name, anm).
"Remain is better than that"
It is a race against time before most people realise that this is true. And there is v little left.
Tick tock.
Brexiteers must be terrified. It is all very well spending decades campaigning for something, but to actually almost achieve it and then have the whole golden bowl of honey turn to dust between your fingers must be terrible.
I almost feel their pain.
I have to laugh, May's everlasting transition Brexit will end up annoying Hannanites as we stay in the CU, hard Brexiteers as we stay in the SM and with FoM and Remainers as we still technically leave the EU.
However most of the country will probably shrug their shoulders and go back to watching Corrie thinking what on earth was the point of all that
1. Persuade everyone that No Deal would be a catastrophe. Plan lorry parks on motorways, urge the NHS to stockpile medicine, ruminate about food shortages.
Your already in trouble on point one as most people "In real life" don't believe a word of it...
There is no majority for the NI backstop. You keep ignoring that.
There's no majority for Chequers+backstops-all-the-way-down.
There might be a majority for the UK to join the EEA+CU indefinitely though. There is a deal May could do with Labour and the SNP, if she wanted it.
Means FOM
Yes.
Though if we do go into transition, with or without a backstop on 29 March, a #peoplesvote becomes obselete. Those Remainers then are likely to back EEA, and likely to command a majority in the country.
FOM may well be the price of Brexit.
Except EEA/EFTA excludes the Customs Union and we would have to stay in the Single Market and Customs Union to avoid a hard border in Ireland
Which means a new mMPs will never, ever vote for it.
Which we would have given we are cotland voting to leave the UK
No vote is required for the no deal Brexit.
Who is going to propose SM and CU.
And how are they going to get around breaking up the Union to do so?
There will be a vote as May has made clear she will refer to Parliament even if No Deal.
All the evidence tonight is May is extendingion together
No, it won't pass. It turns us i
As Hannan says, Remaining is better than that. Or No Deal.
There has to be a strict time limit on this arrangement. Otherwise the Commons votes it down and it is No Deal (or another referendum).
There is no majority in the Commons for either accepting No Deal or for EUref2. There is a majority for kicking the issue into the long grass with SM and CU transition period and backstop
May will give a vague form of carefully crafted civil servant wordage about when a technical solution will be found for the Irish border without giving a specific date but SM and CU will be the backstop and the fate of the UK for years to come in an everlasting transition period
If this is where we end, then she will destroy the Tory party and say Hello to a Corbyn led Labour government. We will literally be run by Marxists.
I do not believe the Tory party will accept that. She will be overthrown.
Giving up Ulster without even a referendum is never going to happen. The revulsion at the thought crosses the Leave/Remain divide; it’s only our hopeless PM and the moronically ignorant Karen Brady who think otherwise.
There is no majority for the NI backstop. You keep ignoring that.
There's no majority for Chequers+backstops-all-the-way-down.
There might be a majority for the UK to join the EEA+CU indefinitely though. There is a deal May could do with Labour and the SNP, if she wanted it.
Means FOM
Yes.
FOM may well be the price of Brexit.
Except EEA/EFTA excludes the Customs Union and we would have to stay in the Single Market and Customs Union to avoid a hard border in Ireland
Which means a new mMPs will never, ever vote for it.
Which we would have given we are cotland voting to leave the UK
No vote is required for the no deal Brexit.
Who is going to propose SM and CU.
And how are they going to get around breaking up the Union to do so?
There will be a vote as May has made clear she will refer to Parliament even if No Deal.
Asnip
It would of course only be No Deal that breaks up the Union, quite possibly leading both Scotland and NI to vote for independence. Indefinite SM +CU limbo for the whole UK in an everlasting transition period will keep the Union together
No, it won't pass. It turns us into a perpetual colony, a feudal province, with no say in the rules, and having to take EU diktats without dissent. And we have no say in trade deals made in our name, and, yet, they will be using our economy as bait. Honest Brits (or English men and women) will not tolel (or another referendum).
"Remain is better than that"
It is a race against time before most people realise that this is true. And there is v little left.
Tick tock.
Brexiteers must be terrified. It is all very well spending decades campaigning for something, but to actually almost achieve it and then have the whole golden bowl of honey turn to dust between your fingers must be terrible.
I almost feel their pain.
I have to laugh, May's everlasting transition Brexit will end up annoying Hannanites as we stay in the CU, hard Brexiteers as we stay in the SM and with FoM and Remainers as we still technically leave the EU.
And you don’t realise that this will prevent it from happening? It is stupid rides like this that make people hate politicians.
The problem with standing in the middle of the road is you can get run over from either direction...
That's where we are with landing on the moon, we could do it in a world of Morris minors, but in a world of Teslas we can't.
We could if we wanted. But we don't. We also lost any economies of scale.
Like steam trains. We could manufacture one today, but it would cost millions.
We did. 60163 Tornado cost about £3,000,000.
China is desperate to get to the moon but simply do not have the technology to do it. Look at NASAs Orion space craft, on their promotional videos they say they are not certain what the effects of the radiation from the Van Allen belts would have on the astronauts. Why don't they know, they sent astronauts through this radiation in the late 69s, early 70s and it apparently had no effect but now they are not sure? These NASA Orion videos are basically saying they have never left the earths orbit before and do not know what will happen. Type in "NASA admits repeatedly that we have never been to the moon" in google. It's a very short video. It's like NASA are wiping Apollo from their history.
NASA has been to the moon ... just no-one overly cared about radiation in the 60s/70s like they do now.
There is no majority for the NI backstop. You keep ignoring that.
There's no majority for Chequers+backstops-all-the-way-down.
There might be a majority for the
Means FOM
Yes.
Though if we do go into transition, with or without a backstop on 29 March, a #peoplesvote becomes obselete. Those Remainers then are likely to back EEA, and likely to command a majority in the country.
FOM may well be the price of Brexit.
Except EEA/EFTA excludes the Customs Union and we would have to stay in the Single Market and Customs Union to avoid a hard border in Ireland
Which means a new mMPs will never, ever vote for it.
Which we would have given we are cotland voting to leave the UK
No vote is required for the no deal Brexit.
Who is going to propose SM and CU.
And how are they going to get around breaking up the Union to do so?
There will be a vote as May has made clear she will refer to Parliament even if No Deal.
All the evidence tonight is May is extendingion together
No, it won't pass. It turns us i
As Hannan says, Remaining is better than that. Or No Deal.
There has to be a strict time limit on this arrangement. Otherwise the Commons votes it down and it is No Deal (or another referendum).
There is no majority in the Commons for either accepting No Deal or for EUref2. There is a majority for kicking the issue into the long grass with SM and CU transition period and backstop
May will give a vague form of carefully crafted civil servant wordage about when a technical solution will be found for the Irish border without giving a specific date but SM and CU will be the backstop and the fate of the UK for years to come in an everlasting transition period
If this is where we end, then she will destroy the Tory party and say Hello to a Corbyn led Labour government. We will literally be run by Marxists.
I do not believe the Tory party will accept that. She will be overthrown.
Giving up Ulster without even a referendum is never going to happen. The revulsion at the thought crosses the Leave/Remain divide; it’s only our hopeless PM and the moronically ignorant Karen Brady who think otherwise.
The only reason to extend the transition is if the British government has a realistic end game in sight. There’s no evidence that this is true. @archer101au is totally right; the backstop is the original sin that cannot be made good. The Commons will not pass a deal that could result in NI being economically annexed by the EU.
May should declare for no deal, or resign. We really need to stop mucking about.
I have a feeling this extension will be the final straw and an announcement from Brady that he has 48 letters will be imminent.
What happens then, who know? Big G says she'll sail through but I'm not so sure... Especially if the Cabinet desert her...
Most Tory MPs voted Remain, 50% voted for May in the 1st round in 2016, 61% in the 2nd round, she will beat a no confidence vote and be safe for a year past Brexit and into the transition
OTOH Democrats doing well in New Jersey 11 which has been GOP since 1985.
Yes it looks like they're going to just edge the House but it'll probably be rather close for comfort. They ought to be winning it much more easily. Something like 225 to 210 seems the most likely result at the moment.
On current polling the Democrats will gain more House seats than they did in 2006 when they last took the House
The only reason to extend the transition is if the British government has a realistic end game in sight. There’s no evidence that this is true. @archer101au is totally right; the backstop is the original sin that cannot be made good. The Commons will not pass a deal that could result in NI being economically annexed by the EU.
May should declare for no deal, or resign. We really need to stop mucking about.
There is no majority for the NI backstop. You keep ignoring that.
There's no majority for Chequers+backstops-all-the-way-down.
There might be a majority for the UK to join the EEA+CU indefinitely though. There is a deal May could do with Labour and the SNP, if she wanted it.
Means FOM
Yes.
Though if we do go into transition, with or without a backstop on 29 March, a #peoplesvote becomes obselete. Those Remainers then are likely to back EEA, and likely to command a majority in the country.
FOM may well be the price of Brexit.
Except EEA/EFTA excludes the Customs Union and we would have to stay in the Single Market and Customs Union to avoid a hard border in Ireland
Which means a new mMPs will never, ever vote for it.
Which we would have given we are cotland voting to leave the UK
No vote is required for the no deal Brexit.
Who is going to propose SM and CU.
And how are they going to get around breaking up the Union to do so?
There will be a vote as May has made clear she will refer to Parliament even if No Deal.
All the evidence tonight is May is extendingion together
No, it won't pass. It turns us i
As Hannan says, Remaining is better than that. Or No Deal.
There has to be a strict time limit on this arrangement. Otherwise the Commons votes it down and it is No Deal (or another referendum).
There is no majority in the Commons for either accepting No Deal or for EUref2. There is a majority for kicking the issue into the long grass with SM and CU transition period and backstop
May will give a vague form of carefully crafted civil servant wordage about when a technical solution will be found for the Irish border without giving a specific date but SM and CU will be the backstop and the fate of the UK for years to come in an everlasting transition period
If this is where we end, then she will destroy the Tory party and say Hello to a Corbyn led Labour government. We will literally be run by Marxists.
I do not believe the Tory party will accept that. She will be overthrown.
Not necessarily, I expect the situation much as now the moderate middle will back May. UKIP will no doubt revive further as it already has post Chequers but the Tories are still at least level with Labour.
Even if Corbyn does become PM he will be likely reliant on minor parties
There is no majority for the NI backstop. You keep ignoring that.
There's no majority for Chequers+backstops-all-the-way-down.
There might be a majority for the UK to join the EEA+CU indefinitely though. There is a deal May could do with Labour and the SNP, if she wanted it.
Means FOM
Except EEA/EFTA excludes the Customs Union and we would have to stay in the Single Market and Customs Union to avoid a hard border in Ireland
Which means a new mMPs will never, ever vote for it.
Which we would have given we are cotland voting to leave the UK
There will be a vote as May has made clear she will refer to Parliament even if No Deal.
All the evidence tonight is May is extendingion together
No, it won't pass. It turns us into a perpetual colony, a feudal province, with no say in the rules, and having to take EU diktats without dissent. And we have no say in trade deals made in our name, and, yet, they will be using our economy as bait. Honest Brits (or English men and women) will not tolerate that. We could perhaps endure this for a year or two, but in perpetuity? Of course not. The Commons will reflect this sentiment.
As Hannan says, Remaining is better than that. Or No Deal.
There has to be a strict time limit on this arrangement. Otherwise the Commons votes it down and it is No Deal (or another referendum).
There is no majority in the Commons for either accepting No Deal or for EUref2. There is a majority for kicking the issue into the long grass with SM and CU transition period and backstop
May will give a vague form of carefully crafted civil servant wordage about when a technical solution will be found for the Irish border without giving a specific date but SM and CU will be the backstop and the fate of the UK for years to come in an everlasting transition period
‘Carefully crafted civil servant wordage’. Or, to give it its proper name, bollocks.
Our political class needs to realise that real life is not like writing an essay for a tutorial. Sometimes you have to make a decision, rather than set out all the arguments and conclude with ‘it’s complicated’ and split the difference between them. The learned helplessness of our political class is appalling.
The Sir Humphreys have taken charge in the form of Robbins
There is no majority for the NI backstop. You keep ignoring that.
There's no majority for Chequers+backstops-all-the-way-down.
There might be a majority for the UK to join the EEA+CU indefinitely though. There is a deal May could do with Labour and the SNP, if she wanted it.
Means FOM
Yes.
FOM may well be the price of Brexit.
Except EEA/EFTA excludes the Customs Union and we would have to stay in the Single Market and Customs Union to avoid a hard border in Ireland
Which means a new mMPs will never, ever vote for it.
Which we would have given we are cotland voting to leave the UK
No vote is required for the no deal Brexit.
Who is going to propose SM and CU.
And how are they going to get around breaking up the Union to do so?
There will be a vote as May has made clear she will refer to Parliament even if No Deal.
Asnip
It would of course only be No Deal that breaks up the Union, quite possibly leading both Scotland and NI to vote for independence. Indefinite SM +CU limbo for the whole UK in an everlasting transition period will keep the Union together
No, it won't pass. It turns us into a perpetual colony, a feudal province, with no say in the rules, and having to take EU diktats without dissent. And we have no say in trade deals made in our name, and, yet, they will be using our economy as bait. Honest Brits (or English men and women) will not tolel (or another referendum).
"Remain is better than that"
It is a race against time before most people realise that this is true. And there is v little left.
Tick tock.
.
I have to laugh, May's everlasting transition Brexit will end up annoying Hannanites as we stay in the CU, hard Brexiteers as we stay in the SM and with FoM and Remainers as we still technically leave the EU.
And you don’t realise that this will prevent it from happening? It is stupid rides like this that make people hate politicians.
The problem with standing in the middle of the road is you can get run over from either direction...
Except the 52% Leave 48% Remain vote means a middle of the road solution remains the likeliest outcome
NASA has been to the moon ... just no-one overly cared about radiation in the 60s/70s like they do now.
Apparently heart problems are the big concern - the Apollo astronauts had an awful rate, something like 5x greater than would be expected (1 in 2 vs 1 in 10). That's from a relatively short flight too, imagine what longer duration spells up there would do.
Comments
There's not much point heading to the Moon. Mars, long term, there is. Long term doesn't generate much necessity for immediate action.
May is actually the perfect Zombie PM for the Zombie Brexit/EU limbo we are now entering and will be in for years
So one year, or two, or three, or twenty are pointless.
Like steam trains. We could manufacture one today, but it would cost millions.
There might be a majority for the UK to join the EEA+CU indefinitely though. There is a deal May could do with Labour and the SNP, if she wanted it.
We could short circuit it by by going for CU+SM as final state instead of Transition 2. But we need to get the consensus on that now.
First realistic plan for Brexit I have seen
In fact May is heading towards that too and while the ERG will oppose it a majority of Tory MPs may back it, most Tory MPs voted Remain after all. May will give a vague promise of a technical solution to end the Irish backstop and a FTA 'in a galaxy far, far away' in reality it could be SM and CU limbo in perpetuity
Even though that was hyperbole the EU still has wider interests in doing a long-term trade deal with Britain.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-45885996
1. Persuade everyone that No Deal would be a catastrophe. Plan lorry parks on motorways, urge the NHS to stockpile medicine, ruminate about food shortages.
2. Keep talking doggedly and earn respect for trying. Explore numerous avenues and make it known you've tried but sadly they don't work.
3. Insist there will only be two choices: No Deal and whatever is agreed. Firmly rule out any kind of amendments.
4. At the very last moment, agree customs union with an unspecific but solemn, 28-nation commitment to move on from it as soon as possible.
It'll probably work, in my opinion, and result in something rather like membership though with less influence, indefinitely.
Though if we do go into transition, with or without a backstop on 29 March, a #peoplesvote becomes obselete. Those Remainers then are likely to back EEA, and likely to command a majority in the country.
FOM may well be the price of Brexit.
With real compromise on FOM a world of possible opportunity would open. But they haven’t yet, so why would they now?
Once they're out the way, Northern Ireland can be sold down the river or we rejoin perhaps if it is Labour/Corbyn + Lib Dems
But not before.
In the meantime, they're happy to continue running down the clock, and toying with May.
The truth is that the EU are not engaging with her because they say she doesn't know what she wants - by which they means she keeps talking about Chequers which is a non starter so they just assume she is stalling.
This is why the Tories are screaming at her to switch to CETA. That solves all the problems except the backstop. At that point there is a real decision for the EU to make - right now they don't see any endgame on trade so they have no incentive to deal.
The remainers see all this through the prism of May getting Parliament to reverse Brexit or call another referendum. I doubt there are more than a few in the Cabinet who think this is the endgame. The vast majority know it will destroy the party and destroy all their careers - they will all be branded as liars forever. They either want a deal, which May cannot now deliver, or they need to prepare for No Deal, which is not something May can lead.
I am sure the Cabinet know the truth - the backstop is what has killed the negotiations and the backstop was May's decision. She can't get away from it and she cannot solve it. It was the biggest misjudgement imaginable and it has destroyed her.
The negotiations are going nowhere. They have not even discussed a draft of the political declaration. There is no solution to the border. Nothing is going to change. Tories are loyal right up until they are not. Everyone is fed up of kicking this can down the road. The road ran out for May tonight.
And they do have plenty of people who are telling them no deal is no worry for them, we see such people on here all the time. They absolutely should care about a deal, they are right to know a big external power is something it is better to have a deal with than no deal. But despite the difficulty of existing the EU already having been made very clear, so any dissuasion to others has been made, they still seem to be prioritising that we do not appear to get any wins (despite a negotiation requiring each side getting something, even if not in equal measure) and trusting May can deliver them that, which she cannot.
So really, they may well be minded to avoid no deal, but that does not seem to be enough. What a strange situation it will be where the outcome is not anything more than a handful of people wanted.
Good night all.
Not going to wash now.
Good night folks
My hunch is that not only would people not object to it much, many (perhaps Leave voters especially) would think it eminent commonsense to have strong borders around an island, regardless of whether Northern Ireland is technically the same country.
I see that place as part of continental european structures, and through that the wider world of international co-operation to tackle the human, societal, economic, environmental and cultural issues of the day. A Europe without Britain is a diminished place, and viceversa. Brexit cuts us off from our family.
In the meantime we would still be in the SM and CU, and NI staying in the SM and CU until a technical solution is found to the Irish border will have been agreed as the backstop.
Julian Smith is an ideological Brexiteer who only deals with Tory MPs, in reality there is a comfortable majority in the Commons for SM +CU which only the ERG and Corbyn for political tactics reasons would really oppose (remember most Tory MPs voted Remain). I know you want to ignore that with your No Deal obsession, in reality barely 100 MPs would vote for a No Deal Brexit and almost all of them from the ERG. MPs will of course vote for SM and CU rather than crash the economy with No Deal Brexit and risk NI and Scotland voting to leave the UK
They are not even pretending to be acting in good faith
But hey, lets stay because err because err well just because.
GOP: 49%
Dem: 45%
Sample so far: 300
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/upshot/elections-polls.html
Who is going to propose SM and CU.
And how are they going to get around breaking up the Union to do so?
Have you ever considered writing for a living?
All the evidence tonight is May is extending the transition period (which will be SM +CU anyway for as long as it lasts) for another year and that will likely end up being indefinite the way things are going with the SM +CU agreed as the backstop for NI, with May making a vague promise that ultimately there will be a technical solution to the border.
It would of course only be No Deal that breaks up the Union, quite possibly leading both Scotland and NI to vote for independence. Indefinite SM +CU limbo for the whole UK in an everlasting transition period will keep the Union together
https://twitter.com/NickBoles/status/1052661731326025729
I wonder how long before the challenge comes.
Makes you wonder who is really pulling Theresa's strings...
It is a race against time before most people realise that this is true. And there is v little left.
Tick tock.
Brexiteers must be terrified. It is all very well spending decades campaigning for something, but to actually almost achieve it and then have the whole golden bowl of honey turn to dust between your fingers must be terrible.
I almost feel their pain.
May will give a vague form of carefully crafted civil servant wordage about when a technical solution will be found for the Irish border without giving a specific date but SM and CU will be the backstop and the fate of the UK for years to come in an everlasting transition period
The only reason to extend the transition is if the British government has a realistic end game in sight. There’s no evidence that this is true. @archer101au is totally right; the backstop is the original sin that cannot be made good. The Commons will not pass a deal that could result in NI being economically annexed by the EU.
May should declare for no deal, or resign. We really need to stop mucking about.
How many times do you need to be told? And by whom?
The Chief Whip has confirmed it.
What happens then, who know? Big G says she'll sail through but I'm not so sure... Especially if the Cabinet desert her...
May is the perfect zombie PM for a country which is divided down the middle between Remainers and No Deal Leavers neither of whom will let the other win. So it will be zombie Brexit led by a zombie PM!
Our political class needs to realise that real life is not like writing an essay for a tutorial. Sometimes you have to make a decision, rather than set out all the arguments and conclude with ‘it’s complicated’ and split the difference between them. The learned helplessness of our political class is appalling.
However most of the country will probably shrug their shoulders and go back to watching Corrie thinking what on earth was the point of all that
Your already in trouble on point one as most people "In real life" don't believe a word of it...
The problem with standing in the middle of the road is you can get run over from either direction...
It’s going to save the Union, apparently. LOL
Even if Corbyn does become PM he will be likely reliant on minor parties
Apparently heart problems are the big concern - the Apollo astronauts had an awful rate, something like 5x greater than would be expected (1 in 2 vs 1 in 10). That's from a relatively short flight too, imagine what longer duration spells up there would do.