I can't think of anything the Labour leadership would like more than inheriting utter chaos from the Tories. Its straight out of the Marxist playbook - the worse the chaos the greater the opportunity for imposing the kind of revolutionary change McDonnell has spent his whole life dreaming about.
That might be so. But there are some sane Labour MPs.
Richard you always forget that sane or bonkers, the raison d'etre of Lab MPs is to get into power so they can have a go at f*cking it up for themselves.
They are not (paid, expected, voted in) to ponder the issue and eventually give the Tories the benefit of the doubt. Their premise is that we would not be in this mess if it had all been left to the Labour Party to sort out in the first place. That view is not time-limited or subject to change depending on circumstances.
Precisely. Labour is the opposition, its role is to oppose.
Anyway, nearly all Labour MPs are remainers and most of them think that voting down Mays deal will lead to a second referendum which will reverse the result of the first. And this view is also held by the vast majority of Labour Party members. So the chances of Labour supporting the deal are in the region of zero.
You may be in for a surprise
I agree - this is high stakes and if the perception develops that Labour are playing "silly b-s" for party gain or Corbynista purity they will be heavily damaged.
Again may I refer you to Exhibit 1: The Iraq War. Tone owns it. Cons voted heavily in favour. Dun't matter.
I'm looking at situation where Labour effectively block the deal. If it is Labour, DUP , Tory nutters and high stakes remainers defeating May then the blame will not be on her or majority Tory side.
It will. But it will also be on those who voted it down. The government will be blamed for being too weak to get their plan through, and/or for not negotiating a better deal (however unrealistic that might have been). But the blame will not stop there. If Labour delivers a No Deal, even by accident, by taking a tactical bet that they could use Brexit to engineer a GE, then firm Remainers will not take that lying down.
What's the timetable on the deal now - at what point does it get ponged back to Brussels ?
Cabinet today, all EU Countries receive deal detail today, the EU then convenes a Council Meeting later this month to formally confirm the deal.
The deal then goes to the HOC and EU Parliaments
It'd be economically awful for us but would be very domestically politically convienient for pretty much everyone here if a member of the EU27 threw its toys out the pram over this.
I'd say there is a non zero possibility Italy might do so.
Someone on here was telling me it is only EU Parliament, not the individual legislatures, who need to approve a WA?
All the 27 have to agree as well as the EU Parliament
A lot of this boils down to the calculation of voting down May's deal from the various factions, and the risk it leads to
1) Change in PM 2) change in Government (General Election) 3) No deal Brexit 4) Re-negotiation 5) Extention of A50 6) Peoples vote 7) No Brexit
Basically the events flow from one to the other which an option of stopping on one of these things, how far down you go depends on your judgement of the circumstances.
Labour needs May’s deal to get through Parliament without its support but with the Tories split. Anything else is problematic and potentially disastrous. But it’s hard to see how it happens.
This is exactly right. The problem Labour has is that to keep all sides of their coalition on board they need to vote against the deal, but only if they don't quite defeat the government. If the deal fails because they successfully defeat the government with the help of their friends in the ERG and maybe the DUP, then they risk getting landed with the fallout, likely to be either the utter chaos of a no-deal crashout, or the utter chaos of trying to reverse the result of the People's Vote.
I can't think of anything the Labour leadership would like more than inheriting utter chaos from the Tories. Its straight out of the Marxist playbook - the worse the chaos the greater the opportunity for imposing the kind of revolutionary change McDonnell has spent his whole life dreaming about.
That might be so. But there are some sane Labour MPs.
Richard you always forget that sane or bonkers, the raison d'etre of Lab MPs is to get into power so they can have a go at f*cking it up for themselves.
They are not (paid, expected, voted in) to ponder the issue and eventually give the Tories the benefit of the doubt. Their premise is that we would not be in this mess if it had all been left to the Labour Party to sort out in the first place. That view is not time-limited or subject to change depending on circumstances.
Precisely. Labour is the opposition, its role is to oppose.
Anyway, nearly all Labour MPs are remainers and most of them think that voting down Mays deal will lead to a second referendum which will reverse the result of the first. And this view is also held by the vast majority of Labour Party members. So the chances of Labour supporting the deal are in the region of zero.
You may be in for a surprise
I agree - this is high stakes and if the perception develops that Labour are playing "silly b-s" for party gain or Corbynista purity they will be heavily damaged.
A lot of the pressure to vote against will be from People's voters, not Corbynistas
I've long thought she may, at the appropriate time, initiate a 24hr leadership confidence vote. Straight after receiving cabinet support might be an appropriate time.... assuming she wins, it further shoots the ERG fox for 12 months and neutralises their power.
It would be bold. But offence is often the best defence.
Not sure that she can do that under the current party rules. The way is only via 48 letters, I think.
If I were May I would be making a statement and calling on all sides to back the deal. I would also stress that when she asked for a strong mandate in last years election the British people didn’t want to give it and expect all our politicians to work for the good of the country.
I've long thought she may, at the appropriate time, initiate a 24hr leadership confidence vote. Straight after receiving cabinet support might be an appropriate time.... assuming she wins, it further shoots the ERG fox for 12 months and neutralises their power.
It would be bold. But offence is often the best defence.
This '12 month' rule is over-rated. It would just take one meeting of the 1922 Exec to amend or delete that rule, so it's hardly a firm foundation on which to base a strategy.
I've long thought she may, at the appropriate time, initiate a 24hr leadership confidence vote. Straight after receiving cabinet support might be an appropriate time.... assuming she wins, it further shoots the ERG fox for 12 months and neutralises their power.
It would be bold. But offence is often the best defence.
Not sure that she can do that under the current party rules. The way is only via 48 letters, I think.
I've long thought she may, at the appropriate time, initiate a 24hr leadership confidence vote. Straight after receiving cabinet support might be an appropriate time.... assuming she wins, it further shoots the ERG fox for 12 months and neutralises their power.
It would be bold. But offence is often the best defence.
Not sure that she can do that under the current party rules. The way is only via 48 letters, I think.
couldn't she do a Major, resign from leadership of the Tories (remain PM) and then re-apply?
I've long thought she may, at the appropriate time, initiate a 24hr leadership confidence vote. Straight after receiving cabinet support might be an appropriate time.... assuming she wins, it further shoots the ERG fox for 12 months and neutralises their power.
It would be bold. But offence is often the best defence.
Not sure that she can do that under the current party rules. The way is only via 48 letters, I think.
She could always ask some of the majority of Tory MPs we never hear about because they aren't either remainer grandstanding or spouting off about vassalage to write a few letters.
What's the timetable on the deal now - at what point does it get ponged back to Brussels ?
Cabinet today, all EU Countries receive deal detail today, the EU then convenes a Council Meeting later this month to formally confirm the deal.
The deal then goes to the HOC and EU Parliaments
It'd be economically awful for us but would be very domestically politically convienient for pretty much everyone here if a member of the EU27 threw its toys out the pram over this.
I'd say there is a non zero possibility Italy might do so.
Someone on here was telling me it is only EU Parliament, not the individual legislatures, who need to approve a WA?
All the 27 have to agree as well as the EU Parliament
Ok. So I was misinformed. That is important re betting. It is a non--trivial possibility. Hope you and your good lady are feeling better btw.
Hello everyone. I've been away for ages, for those of us not quite paying attention, how good is the deal we've got? Can we make trade deals with other countries?
I think the answer is: not yet - maybe later......
Actually that's a very important point. Amidst all the hysteria, drama, threats, speculation, grand-standing and navel-gazing, it's very easy to overlook the fact that we don't actually know much if anything yet about what the future relationship will look like.
Remember also that parliament has to vote on *both* the WA and the FR documents at the same time.
Not really, we're voting on the blueprint future relationship. The actual future relationship is years away
Yes, it's the Framework for the Future Relationship that will be voted on. Sorry for the lack of clarity.
News regarding Plato. Following the recent discussion here regarding Plato I sent her an email enquiring after her health. I have just received a reply from her brother informing me that Phillippa died at home of natural causes aged 51 on 29th June. She had apparently been unwell for some time, but had refused to see a doctor. Her brother tells me what we all knew - Plato lived for scrapping and discussions on forums such as this place.
Interesting that Jo Johnson, Dominic Grieve and now Phillip Lee have spoken out against the deal already. I wonder if they're trying to stiffen the resolve of their wavering colleagues.
What's the timetable on the deal now - at what point does it get ponged back to Brussels ?
Cabinet today, all EU Countries receive deal detail today, the EU then convenes a Council Meeting later this month to formally confirm the deal.
The deal then goes to the HOC and EU Parliaments
It'd be economically awful for us but would be very domestically politically convienient for pretty much everyone here if a member of the EU27 threw its toys out the pram over this.
I'd say there is a non zero possibility Italy might do so.
Someone on here was telling me it is only EU Parliament, not the individual legislatures, who need to approve a WA?
All the 27 have to agree as well as the EU Parliament
Ok. So I was misinformed. That is important re betting. It is a non--trivial possibility. Hope you and your good lady are feeling better btw.
Thank you. Slowly improving. On the 27 I think it is done on QMV
News regarding Plato. Following the recent discussion here regarding Plato I sent her an email enquiring after her health. I have just received a reply from her brother informing me that Phillippa died at home of natural causes aged 51 on 29th June. She had apparently been unwell for some time, but had refused to see a doctor. Her brother tells me what we all knew - Plato lived for scrapping and discussions on forums such as this place.
Oh. That's awful news Thanks for informing us, 51 is far too young to go.
What's the timetable on the deal now - at what point does it get ponged back to Brussels ?
Cabinet today, all EU Countries receive deal detail today, the EU then convenes a Council Meeting later this month to formally confirm the deal.
The deal then goes to the HOC and EU Parliaments
It'd be economically awful for us but would be very domestically politically convienient for pretty much everyone here if a member of the EU27 threw its toys out the pram over this.
I'd say there is a non zero possibility Italy might do so.
Someone on here was telling me it is only EU Parliament, not the individual legislatures, who need to approve a WA?
A majority in the European Parliament and QMV in the Council.
That is what I was told. Now I am confused. Big G says otherwise.
News regarding Plato. Following the recent discussion here regarding Plato I sent her an email enquiring after her health. I have just received a reply from her brother informing me that Phillippa died at home of natural causes aged 51 on 29th June. She had apparently been unwell for some time, but had refused to see a doctor. Her brother tells me what we all knew - Plato lived for scrapping and discussions on forums such as this place.
News regarding Plato. Following the recent discussion here regarding Plato I sent her an email enquiring after her health. I have just received a reply from her brother informing me that Phillippa died at home of natural causes aged 51 on 29th June. She had apparently been unwell for some time, but had refused to see a doctor. Her brother tells me what we all knew - Plato lived for scrapping and discussions on forums such as this place.
News regarding Plato. Following the recent discussion here regarding Plato I sent her an email enquiring after her health. I have just received a reply from her brother informing me that Phillippa died at home of natural causes aged 51 on 29th June. She had apparently been unwell for some time, but had refused to see a doctor. Her brother tells me what we all knew - Plato lived for scrapping and discussions on forums such as this place.
That's very sad news indeed. Thanks for letting us know.
News regarding Plato. Following the recent discussion here regarding Plato I sent her an email enquiring after her health. I have just received a reply from her brother informing me that Phillippa died at home of natural causes aged 51 on 29th June. She had apparently been unwell for some time, but had refused to see a doctor. Her brother tells me what we all knew - Plato lived for scrapping and discussions on forums such as this place.
News regarding Plato. Following the recent discussion here regarding Plato I sent her an email enquiring after her health. I have just received a reply from her brother informing me that Phillippa died at home of natural causes aged 51 on 29th June. She had apparently been unwell for some time, but had refused to see a doctor. Her brother tells me what we all knew - Plato lived for scrapping and discussions on forums such as this place.
That is just so sad. I enjoyed Plato contributions even though I rarely agreed with her.
I've long thought she may, at the appropriate time, initiate a 24hr leadership confidence vote. Straight after receiving cabinet support might be an appropriate time.... assuming she wins, it further shoots the ERG fox for 12 months and neutralises their power.
It would be bold. But offence is often the best defence.
Not sure that she can do that under the current party rules. The way is only via 48 letters, I think.
couldn't she do a Major, resign from leadership of the Tories (remain PM) and then re-apply?
Nope, once you resign or lose a VONC you are automatically barred from standing in the subsequent leadership contest.
Is why IDS couldn't stand again in 2003, is something Labour should have in their rules, would have stopped Corbyn standing again in 2016.
What's the timetable on the deal now - at what point does it get ponged back to Brussels ?
Cabinet today, all EU Countries receive deal detail today, the EU then convenes a Council Meeting later this month to formally confirm the deal.
The deal then goes to the HOC and EU Parliaments
It'd be economically awful for us but would be very domestically politically convienient for pretty much everyone here if a member of the EU27 threw its toys out the pram over this.
I'd say there is a non zero possibility Italy might do so.
Someone on here was telling me it is only EU Parliament, not the individual legislatures, who need to approve a WA?
A majority in the European Parliament and QMV in the Council.
That is what I was told. Now I am confused. Big G says otherwise.
Mr. Gadfly, I feared something like that had happened, but thank you for letting us know. (Her Twitter had fallen silent abruptly and she didn't reply to an e-mail I sent asking if she was ok).
I've long thought she may, at the appropriate time, initiate a 24hr leadership confidence vote. Straight after receiving cabinet support might be an appropriate time.... assuming she wins, it further shoots the ERG fox for 12 months and neutralises their power.
It would be bold. But offence is often the best defence.
Not sure that she can do that under the current party rules. The way is only via 48 letters, I think.
couldn't she do a Major, resign from leadership of the Tories (remain PM) and then re-apply?
Nope, once you resign or lose a VONC you are automatically barred from standing in the subsequent leadership contest
Has that changed since Major then? (probably has I'm guessing)
Labour needs May’s deal to get through Parliament without its support but with the Tories split. Anything else is problematic and potentially disastrous. But it’s hard to see how it happens.
This is exactly right. The problem Labour has is that to keep all sides of their coalition on board they need to vote against the deal, but only if they don't quite defeat the government. If the deal fails because they successfully defeat the government with the help of their friends in the ERG and maybe the DUP, then they risk getting landed with the fallout, likely to be either the utter chaos of a no-deal crashout, or the utter chaos of trying to reverse the result of the People's Vote.
I can't think of anything the Labour leadership would like more than inheriting utter chaos from the Tories. Its straight out of the Marxist playbook - the worse the chaos the greater the opportunity for imposing the kind of revolutionary change McDonnell has spent his whole life dreaming about.
That might be so. But there are some sane Labour MPs.
Richard you always forget that sane or bonkers, the raison d'etre of Lab MPs is to get into power so they can have a go at f*cking it up for themselves.
They are not (paid, expected, voted in) to ponder the issue and eventually give the Tories the benefit of the doubt. Their premise is that we would not be in this mess if it had all been left to the Labour Party to sort out in the first place. That view is not time-limited or subject to change depending on circumstances.
Precisely. Labour is the opposition, its role is to oppose.
Anyway, nearly all Labour MPs are remainers and most of them think that voting down Mays deal will lead to a second referendum which will reverse the result of the first. And this view is also held by the vast majority of Labour Party members. So the chances of Labour supporting the deal are in the region of zero.
You may be in for a surprise
I agree - this is high stakes and if the perception develops that Labour are playing "silly b-s" for party gain or Corbynista purity they will be heavily damaged.
I dont think so, Brexit is a wholly owned by the Tories project.
There are similarities though to Blair getting the Iraq war approved only via oppisition votes. Nobody holds that against the Tories, but it is poison for Blairites.
Labour cannot lose on this one.
Brexit is owned by the voters - many of whom vote(d) Labour.
I've long thought she may, at the appropriate time, initiate a 24hr leadership confidence vote. Straight after receiving cabinet support might be an appropriate time.... assuming she wins, it further shoots the ERG fox for 12 months and neutralises their power.
It would be bold. But offence is often the best defence.
This '12 month' rule is over-rated. It would just take one meeting of the 1922 Exec to amend or delete that rule, so it's hardly a firm foundation on which to base a strategy.
Indeed - but that would be hard to achieve unless the backbenchers were utterly united she had to go and she was clinging on regardless. It is hard to conceive of another situation within 12m of winning a vote where it would be acceptable or possible to change those rules against her wishes.
I admit it's the John Major approach, but the rules are easier for Mrs May now than they were for him.
It has a risk but I can see it bringing a degree of stability if she pulled it off.
News regarding Plato. Following the recent discussion here regarding Plato I sent her an email enquiring after her health. I have just received a reply from her brother informing me that Phillippa died at home of natural causes aged 51 on 29th June. She had apparently been unwell for some time, but had refused to see a doctor. Her brother tells me what we all knew - Plato lived for scrapping and discussions on forums such as this place.
Asked this a couple of threads back but asking again in case somebody knows:
If there's a deal, what now needs to happen on what timetable? Apparently it has to go through the UK parliament - is there any particular deadline on that, or is it enough for it to be passed at some time before the exit date?
The related question is, say the Conservative Party decided that it wants to enjoy a long, relaxing leadership contest, would that blow up the process in some way, or could the EP and everybody else carry on considering the deal as if the UK were going to accept it, then give whatever unlucky person ends up as UK PM a choice of taking it or leaving it?
My understanding is: Today - Cabinet Early next week - EU27 Europe affairs ministers Nov 25th - EU summit, heads of government Early Dec - meaningful vote in House of Commons Jan to March 29th - Pass the legislation putting the withdrawal agreement into law through UK and EU Parliaments. March 30th onwards - Negotiate the future relationship during the transition period.
The EU can continue to put their legal pieces into place on the assumption - until told otherwise - that the new PM would stick to the agreement. It would cut the time to pass the legislation through the Commons, which would be problematic if we assume that the fact of a leadership contest implies strong opposition to it on the Conservative backbenches.
If May loses a vote of no confidence then her deal dies with her I would have thought.
I've long thought she may, at the appropriate time, initiate a 24hr leadership confidence vote. Straight after receiving cabinet support might be an appropriate time.... assuming she wins, it further shoots the ERG fox for 12 months and neutralises their power.
It would be bold. But offence is often the best defence.
Not sure that she can do that under the current party rules. The way is only via 48 letters, I think.
couldn't she do a Major, resign from leadership of the Tories (remain PM) and then re-apply?
Nope, once you resign or lose a VONC you are automatically barred from standing in the subsequent leadership contest
Has that changed since Major then? (probably has I'm guessing)
I've long thought she may, at the appropriate time, initiate a 24hr leadership confidence vote. Straight after receiving cabinet support might be an appropriate time.... assuming she wins, it further shoots the ERG fox for 12 months and neutralises their power.
It would be bold. But offence is often the best defence.
Not sure that she can do that under the current party rules. The way is only via 48 letters, I think.
48 letters can be procured - they can be supporters as well as detractors wishing to support her to resolve this by lancing the boil.
What's the timetable on the deal now - at what point does it get ponged back to Brussels ?
Cabinet today, all EU Countries receive deal detail today, the EU then convenes a Council Meeting later this month to formally confirm the deal.
The deal then goes to the HOC and EU Parliaments
It'd be economically awful for us but would be very domestically politically convienient for pretty much everyone here if a member of the EU27 threw its toys out the pram over this.
I'd say there is a non zero possibility Italy might do so.
Someone on here was telling me it is only EU Parliament, not the individual legislatures, who need to approve a WA?
A majority in the European Parliament and QMV in the Council.
That is what I was told. Now I am confused. Big G says otherwise.
I did qualify it to QMV for the 27
Yes you did. Sorry for confusion. My misunderstanding.
Asked this a couple of threads back but asking again in case somebody knows:
If there's a deal, what now needs to happen on what timetable? Apparently it has to go through the UK parliament - is there any particular deadline on that, or is it enough for it to be passed at some time before the exit date?
The related question is, say the Conservative Party decided that it wants to enjoy a long, relaxing leadership contest, would that blow up the process in some way, or could the EP and everybody else carry on considering the deal as if the UK were going to accept it, then give whatever unlucky person ends up as UK PM a choice of taking it or leaving it?
If May loses a vote of no confidence then her deal dies with her I would have thought.
The EU would be under no complusion to re-enter any negotiations though. This would simply say 'This is the deal, take it or leave it'.
the idea that Labour would get a 'better' one falls apart at the first hurdle.
News regarding Plato. Following the recent discussion here regarding Plato I sent her an email enquiring after her health. I have just received a reply from her brother informing me that Phillippa died at home of natural causes aged 51 on 29th June. She had apparently been unwell for some time, but had refused to see a doctor. Her brother tells me what we all knew - Plato lived for scrapping and discussions on forums such as this place.
Let the ultras on both sides and the mediaevalists of the DUP vent their spleen in the first cycle - with only the occasional moderate voice like Hague to ensure the initial narrative doesn't kill off the deal before it breathes life (the ultras key objective atm).
This allows the 2/3rd of parliament and the country that is reasonably sane to see exactly who they would be trooping through the lobbies with if they oppose this deal (as if they didn't already know what nutters Soubry and Moggy are).
It leaves the Moggites with little new to say in the next news cycle... they opposed it before they even saw the detail. Hardly considered action in the national interest.
Then with all/almost all of the cabinet on side, the real push from govt begins, choregraphed with the EU. It will be powerful, and much of it aimed at the long-suffering/bored/reasonable public.
I think Labour will be hard pressed to argue in that scenario that voting the deal down is in the national interest and not narrow party interest - particularly when May is seen to be calling the bluff of the ultras.
I could be wrong. But it's going to be great to watch the next couple of weeks. If Mrs May fails, she will go down as a failure regardless of the merits. If the pulls this off, she will (quite rightly) be seen in a much more positive light and receive credit for bridging the seemingly impossible in the face on unceasing unpleasantness.
Yes we do keep forgetting that it isn’t the ultra leavers or remainers that compose of the mildly disinterested British population. She’s playing the line of leaving the EU and trying to do it with as little disruption as possible. She’ll get away with it and come out stronger as long as we are no longer pumping in net £9 billion a year.
Except one of the little details yet to emerge is how much more, for how much longer.....
EU will make it forever, they will keep taking the cash and we will be in limbo forever , paying up and getting no say. Total surrender.
Labour needs May’s deal to get through Parliament without its support but with the Tories split. Anything else is problematic and potentially disastrous. But it’s hard to see how it happens.
This is exactly right. The problem Labour has is that to keep all sides of their coalition on board they need to vote against the deal, but only if they don't quite defeat the government. If the deal fails because they successfully defeat the government with the help of their friends in the ERG and maybe the DUP, then they risk getting landed with the fallout, likely to be either the utter chaos of a no-deal crashout, or the utter chaos of trying to reverse the result of the People's Vote.
I can't think of anything the Labour leadership would like more than inheriting utter chaos from the Tories. Its straight out of the Marxist playbook - the worse the chaos the greater the opportunity for imposing the kind of revolutionary change McDonnell has spent his whole life dreaming about.
.
Precisely. Labour is the opposition, its role is to oppose.
Anyway, nearly all Labour MPs are remainers and most of them think that voting down Mays deal will lead to a second referendum which will reverse the result of the first. And this view is also held by the vast majority of Labour Party members. So the chances of Labour supporting the deal are in the region of zero.
You may be in for a surprise
I agree - this is high stakes and if the perception develops that Labour are playing "silly b-s" for party gain or Corbynista purity they will be heavily damaged.
A lot of the pressure to vote against will be from People's voters, not Corbynistas
So peoples vote want a No Deal scenario??
So long as they can BLAME THE TORIES.
Some will want No Deal, as they think it would have us begging to rejoin the EU on any terms.
Labour needs May’s deal to get through Parliament without its support but with the Tories split. Anything else is problematic and potentially disastrous. But it’s hard to see how it happens.
I can't think of anything the Labour leadership would like more than inheriting utter chaos from the Tories. Its straight out of the Marxist playbook - the worse the chaos the greater the opportunity for imposing the kind of revolutionary change McDonnell has spent his whole life dreaming about.
That might be so. But there are some sane Labour MPs.
Richard you always forget that sane or bonkers, the raison d'etre of Lab MPs is to get into power so they can have a go at f*cking it up for themselves.
They are not (paid, expected, voted in) to ponder the issue and eventually give the Tories the benefit of the doubt. Their premise is that we would not be in this mess if it had all been left to the Labour Party to sort out in the first place. That view is not time-limited or subject to change depending on circumstances.
Precisely. Labour is the opposition, its role is to oppose.
Anyway, nearly all Labour MPs are remainers and most of them think that voting down Mays deal will lead to a second referendum which will reverse the result of the first. And this view is also held by the vast majority of Labour Party members. So the chances of Labour supporting the deal are in the region of zero.
You may be in for a surprise
I agree - this is high stakes and if the perception develops that Labour are playing "silly b-s" for party gain or Corbynista purity they will be heavily damaged.
I dont think so, Brexit is a wholly owned by the Tories project.
There are similarities though to Blair getting the Iraq war approved only via oppisition votes. Nobody holds that against the Tories, but it is poison for Blairites.
Labour cannot lose on this one.
The other thing about Iraq was the dodgy dossier - it was based on lies that were probably authorised by Campbell and blair
News regarding Plato. Following the recent discussion here regarding Plato I sent her an email enquiring after her health. I have just received a reply from her brother informing me that Phillippa died at home of natural causes aged 51 on 29th June. She had apparently been unwell for some time, but had refused to see a doctor. Her brother tells me what we all knew - Plato lived for scrapping and discussions on forums such as this place.
Thats really sad news
I always thought Plato kept us on our toes, her posts while often provocative were never boring
Labour needs May’s deal to get through Parliament without its support but with the Tories split. Anything else is problematic and potentially disastrous. But it’s hard to see how it happens.
The problem Labour has is that to keep all sides of their coalition on board they need to vote against the deal, but only if they don't quite defeat the government. If the deal fails because they successfully defeat the government with the help of their friends in the ERG and maybe the DUP, then they risk getting landed with the fallout, likely to be either the utter chaos of a no-deal crashout, or the utter chaos of trying to reverse the result of the People's Vote.
Its straight out of the Marxist playbook - the worse the chaos the greater the opportunity for imposing the kind of revolutionary change McDonnell has spent his whole life dreaming about.
That might be so. But there are some sane Labour MPs.
Richard you always forget that sane or bonkers, the raison d'etre of Lab MPs is to get into power so they can have a go at f*cking it up for themselves.
They are not (paid, expected, voted in) to ponder the issue and eventually give the Tories the benefit of the doubt. Their premise is that we would not be in this mess if it had all been left to the Labour Party to sort out in the first place. That view is not time-limited or subject to change depending on circumstances.
Precisely. Labour is the opposition, its role is to oppose.
Anyway, nearly all Labour MPs are remainers and most of them think that voting down Mays deal will lead to a second referendum which will reverse the result of the first. And this view is also held by the vast majority of Labour Party members. So the chances of Labour supporting the deal are in the region of zero.
You may be in for a surprise
I agree - this is high stakes and if the perception develops that Labour are playing "silly b-s" for party gain or Corbynista purity they will be heavily damaged.
I dont think so, Brexit is a wholly owned by the Tories project.
There are similarities though to Blair getting the Iraq war approved only via oppisition votes. Nobody holds that against the Tories, but it is poison for Blairites.
Labour cannot lose on this one.
Brexit is owned by the voters - many of whom vote(d) Labour.
Only just over half of them (shouldn't really need saying) and probably no longer.
Many many words today. But I want to challenge that this is BINO. Norway might be, but this still counts as hard Brexit to me and I'm sure many others who've been sceptical about the whole project all along.
We're out of our EU trade deals, out of single market for 80% of economy, out of freedom of movement. That harder Brexits were on the table doesn't make it Brexit In Name Only - just look at the reaction from the Remain side to the reports. Where are the remainers saying that they feared it would be worse? Can't see any.
Don't confuse the backstop with the future relationship which is yet to be negotiated. The backstop is only an insurance policy. The ultimate direction of travel is towards something more like BINO.
Labour needs May’s deal to get through Parliament without its support but with the Tories split. Anything else is problematic and potentially disastrous. But it’s hard to see how it happens.
This is exactly right. The problem Labour has is that to keep all sides of their coalition on board they need to vote against the deal, but only if they don't quite defeat the government. If the deal fails because they successfully defeat the government with the help of their friends in the ERG and maybe the DUP, then they risk getting landed with the fallout, likely to be either the utter chaos of a no-deal crashout, or the utter chaos of trying to reverse the result of the People's Vote.
I can't think of anything the Labour leadership would like more than inheriting utter chaos from the Tories. Its straight out of the Marxist playbook - the worse the chaos the greater the opportunity for imposing the kind of revolutionary change McDonnell has spent his whole life dreaming about.
That might be so. But there are some sane Labour MPs.
Richard you always forget that sane or bonkers, the raison d'etre of Lab MPs is to get into power so they can have a go at f*cking it up for themselves.
They are not (paid, expected, voted in) to ponder the issue and eventually give the Tories the benefit of the doubt. Their premise is that we would not be in this mess if it had all been left to the Labour Party to sort out in the first place. That view is not time-limited or subject to change depending on circumstances.
Precisely. Labour is the opposition, its role is to oppose.
Anyway, nearly all Labour MPs are remainers and most of them think that voting down Mays deal will lead to a second referendum which will reverse the result of the first. And this view is also held by the vast majority of Labour Party members. So the chances of Labour supporting the deal are in the region of zero.
You may be in for a surprise
I agree - this is high stakes and if the perception develops that Labour are playing "silly b-s" for party gain or Corbynista purity they will be heavily damaged.
Labour will abstain, that is their normal position, then say it was a big girl who did it and ran away.
Let the ultras on both sides and the mediaevalists of the DUP vent their spleen in the first cycle - with only the occasional moderate voice like Hague to ensure the initial narrative doesn't kill off the deal before it breathes life (the ultras key objective atm).
This allows the 2/3rd of parliament and the country that is reasonably sane to see exactly who they would be trooping through the lobbies with if they oppose this deal (as if they didn't already know what nutters Soubry and Moggy are).
It leaves the Moggites with little new to say in the next news cycle... they opposed it before they even saw the detail. Hardly considered action in the national interest.
Then with all/almost all of the cabinet on side, the real push from govt begins, choregraphed with the EU. It will be powerful, and much of it aimed at the long-suffering/bored/reasonable public.
I think Labour will be hard pressed to argue in that scenario that voting the deal down is in the national interest and not narrow party interest - particularly when May is seen to be calling the bluff of the ultras.
I could be wrong. But it's going to be great to watch the next couple of weeks. If Mrs May fails, she will go down as a failure regardless of the merits. If the pulls this off, she will (quite rightly) be seen in a much more positive light and receive credit for bridging the seemingly impossible in the face on unceasing unpleasantness.
Yes we do keep forgetting that it isn’t the ultra leavers or remainers that compose of the mildly disinterested British population. She’s playing the line of leaving the EU and trying to do it with as little disruption as possible. She’ll get away with it and come out stronger as long as we are no longer pumping in net £9 billion a year.
Except one of the little details yet to emerge is how much more, for how much longer.....
EU will make it forever, they will keep taking the cash and we will be in limbo forever , paying up and getting no say. Total surrender.
I can't believe that our negotiating team would come away, having accepted that.
If they have, I can't believe that the Cabinet would accept it.
If they do, I can't believe that Westminster will accept it.
Seems my belief systems are about to be sorely tested!
News regarding Plato. Following the recent discussion here regarding Plato I sent her an email enquiring after her health. I have just received a reply from her brother informing me that Phillippa died at home of natural causes aged 51 on 29th June. She had apparently been unwell for some time, but had refused to see a doctor. Her brother tells me what we all knew - Plato lived for scrapping and discussions on forums such as this place.
News regarding Plato. Following the recent discussion here regarding Plato I sent her an email enquiring after her health. I have just received a reply from her brother informing me that Phillippa died at home of natural causes aged 51 on 29th June. She had apparently been unwell for some time, but had refused to see a doctor. Her brother tells me what we all knew - Plato lived for scrapping and discussions on forums such as this place.
Oh. That's awful news Thanks for informing us, 51 is far too young to go.
News regarding Plato. Following the recent discussion here regarding Plato I sent her an email enquiring after her health. I have just received a reply from her brother informing me that Phillippa died at home of natural causes aged 51 on 29th June. She had apparently been unwell for some time, but had refused to see a doctor. Her brother tells me what we all knew - Plato lived for scrapping and discussions on forums such as this place.
Dreadful news. She and I used to get on well and often messaged via the forum software. I will never again look at a Cuban Heel without thinking of her. It was her favourite.
On the subject of blame: Ed Miliband maneged to get the blame for our failure to get involved in Siria at an early date.
There are quite a few ways that Labour could get the blame. The one I think is the biggest risk and no one is considering, is that they will now have to commit to a position that May gets to frame. This is a deal that meets a lot of the tests, and is not far from the Labour position. May could stress that Labour should support it to demonstrate their manifesto pledge to honour the referendum result. Are they willing to cause significant economic problems over x y and z. Once Labour have to commit they alienate seemingly either their supporters, or a lot of their voters. In order to maintain the party they should commit to remaining, as they would seem to have more leeway in Leave constituencies, and they can’t fight an imminent election without volunteers
News regarding Plato. Following the recent discussion here regarding Plato I sent her an email enquiring after her health. I have just received a reply from her brother informing me that Phillippa died at home of natural causes aged 51 on 29th June. She had apparently been unwell for some time, but had refused to see a doctor. Her brother tells me what we all knew - Plato lived for scrapping and discussions on forums such as this place.
Horrible news. Plato was incredibly kind to me via DM when I needed support. A genuinely kind, thoughtful woman. I'll miss her.
A lot of this boils down to the calculation of voting down May's deal from the various factions, and the risk it leads to
1) Change in PM 2) change in Government (General Election) 3) No deal Brexit 4) Re-negotiation 5) Extention of A50 6) Peoples vote 7) No Brexit
Basically the events flow from one to the other which an option of stopping on one of these things, how far down you go depends on your judgement of the circumstances.
Interesting list. Change in PM - Only worthwhile if changing to one that wants 'No Deal' or 'People's Vote' Change in Government - Can only see this happening by accident. Even if it does the problem doesn't go away. No Deal Brexit - Nobody wants this. Re-negotiation - Will the EU have anything much different to offer? People's Vote - A way out. Result could be Chequers, Crash Out or Stay No Brexit - Available via People's Vote
On the subject of blame: Ed Miliband maneged to get the blame for our failure to get involved in Siria at an early date.
There are quite a few ways that Labour could get the blame. The one I think is the biggest risk and no one is considering, is that they will now have to commit to a position that May gets to frame. This is a deal that meets a lot of the tests, and is not far from the Labour position. May could stress that Labour should support it to demonstrate their manifesto pledge to honour the referendum result. Are they willing to cause significant economic problems over x y and z. Once Labour have to commit they alienate seemingly either their supporters, or a lot of their voters. In order to maintain the party they should commit to remaining, as they would seem to have more leeway in Leave constituencies, and they can’t fight an imminent election without volunteers
Labour have to keep assuring Leave supporters that they support Leave (but not the government's Leave) while assuring Remain supporters that they really favour Remain.
I don't see that the Backstop can require us to make budgetary contributions, because, ex hypothesi, we have left (unlike the implementation period). But I will wait and see, becaue this particular backstop is more implementation-y.
The EU would be under no complusion to re-enter any negotiations though. This would simply say 'This is the deal, take it or leave it'.
the idea that Labour would get a 'better' one falls apart at the first hurdle.
Dunno, Corbyn might be able to offer something that was better for both sides than what they've already got, as TMay was heavily constrained by the DUP and internal Conservative Party neuroses.
If the Republicans start gerrymandering State boundaries to their advantage then future Democrats will one day look back fondly to the fairness of the current 50-State Senate.
The EU would be under no complusion to re-enter any negotiations though. This would simply say 'This is the deal, take it or leave it'.
the idea that Labour would get a 'better' one falls apart at the first hurdle.
Dunno, Corbyn might be able to offer something that was better for both sides than what they've already got, as TMay was heavily constrained by the DUP and internal Conservative Party neuroses.
On the subject of blame: Ed Miliband maneged to get the blame for our failure to get involved in Siria at an early date.
There are quite a few ways that Labour could get the blame. The one I think is the biggest risk and no one is considering, is that they will now have to commit to a position that May gets to frame. This is a deal that meets a lot of the tests, and is not far from the Labour position. May could stress that Labour should support it to demonstrate their manifesto pledge to honour the referendum result. Are they willing to cause significant economic problems over x y and z. Once Labour have to commit they alienate seemingly either their supporters, or a lot of their voters. In order to maintain the party they should commit to remaining, as they would seem to have more leeway in Leave constituencies, and they can’t fight an imminent election without volunteers
Labour have to keep assuring Leave supporters that they support Leave (but not the government's Leave) while assuring Remain supporters that they really favour Remain.
Yes but as the end point approaches this is a risk to them.
News regarding Plato. Following the recent discussion here regarding Plato I sent her an email enquiring after her health. I have just received a reply from her brother informing me that Phillippa died at home of natural causes aged 51 on 29th June. She had apparently been unwell for some time, but had refused to see a doctor. Her brother tells me what we all knew - Plato lived for scrapping and discussions on forums such as this place.
If the Republicans start gerrymandering State boundaries to their advantage then future Democrats will one day look back fondly to the fairness of the current 50-State Senate.
The Democrats can play that game, too... The Republicans are doing pretty well out of the current set of boundaries, so they probably wouldn't be wise to open the box...
If the Republicans start gerrymandering State boundaries to their advantage then future Democrats will one day look back fondly to the fairness of the current 50-State Senate.
The Democrats can play that game, too... The Republicans are doing pretty well out of the current set of boundaries, so they probably wouldn't be wise to open the box...
In principle that is true, but in practice the Republicans are more committed and have been more successful. Also the Democrat vote is somewhat self-gerrymandered in the big cities.
Very sad news about Plato although she drove me crazy.
I met her once at a PB Sussex gathering near Gatwick and she was full of life and energy. 51 is too young to die.
I know there's a lot going on today and water under the bridge but it might be nice for old time's sake to put an in memoriam passage on a thread header today, akin to what was done for the sad passing Mark Senior.
If the Republicans start gerrymandering State boundaries to their advantage then future Democrats will one day look back fondly to the fairness of the current 50-State Senate.
If the Republicans start gerrymandering State boundaries to their advantage then future Democrats will one day look back fondly to the fairness of the current 50-State Senate.
News regarding Plato. Following the recent discussion here regarding Plato I sent her an email enquiring after her health. I have just received a reply from her brother informing me that Phillippa died at home of natural causes aged 51 on 29th June. She had apparently been unwell for some time, but had refused to see a doctor. Her brother tells me what we all knew - Plato lived for scrapping and discussions on forums such as this place.
Comments
1) Change in PM
2) change in Government (General Election)
3) No deal Brexit
4) Re-negotiation
5) Extention of A50
6) Peoples vote
7) No Brexit
Basically the events flow from one to the other which an option of stopping on one of these things, how far down you go depends on your judgement of the circumstances.
Hope you and your good lady are feeling better btw.
ERG-types are barely any better.
May she rest in peace
Is why IDS couldn't stand again in 2003, is something Labour should have in their rules, would have stopped Corbyn standing again in 2016.
RIP Miss Plato.
I admit it's the John Major approach, but the rules are easier for Mrs May now than they were for him.
It has a risk but I can see it bringing a degree of stability if she pulled it off.
Today - Cabinet
Early next week - EU27 Europe affairs ministers
Nov 25th - EU summit, heads of government
Early Dec - meaningful vote in House of Commons
Jan to March 29th - Pass the legislation putting the withdrawal agreement into law through UK and EU Parliaments.
March 30th onwards - Negotiate the future relationship during the transition period.
The EU can continue to put their legal pieces into place on the assumption - until told otherwise - that the new PM would stick to the agreement. It would cut the time to pass the legislation through the Commons, which would be problematic if we assume that the fact of a leadership contest implies strong opposition to it on the Conservative backbenches.
If May loses a vote of no confidence then her deal dies with her I would have thought.
Was part of William Hagues reforms in 1998/99.
the idea that Labour would get a 'better' one falls apart at the first hurdle.
I met her once at a PB Sussex gathering near Gatwick and she was full of life and energy. 51 is too young to die.
I always thought Plato kept us on our toes, her posts while often provocative were never boring
If they have, I can't believe that the Cabinet would accept it.
If they do, I can't believe that Westminster will accept it.
Seems my belief systems are about to be sorely tested!
She had an interesting political evolution.
Change in PM - Only worthwhile if changing to one that wants 'No Deal' or 'People's Vote'
Change in Government - Can only see this happening by accident. Even if it does the problem doesn't go away.
No Deal Brexit - Nobody wants this.
Re-negotiation - Will the EU have anything much different to offer?
People's Vote - A way out. Result could be Chequers, Crash Out or Stay
No Brexit - Available via People's Vote
https://twitter.com/SeanTrende/status/1062673778080145408
"Does the Prime Minister agree that she is the greatest traitor in our country's history?"
Nailed on that she will then