Listening to the phone in following Any Questions and the audience reaction Lord Adonis's solution is attracting attention. Another referendum. "Do you favour Mrs May's plan or to Remain". Simple and easy to understand. I suspect this plan has legs and will be difficult to stop.
Any ideas for a collective noun for the members of the ERG?
So a referendum giving leavers a choice between a deal they apparently detest and remain. When most of them want no deal or a different deal. Can't see where that might fall down... Not sure even Labour could vote for that given their official policy.
I would recommend Leavers focus on the political declaration for the future long term relationship.
It actually isn't that bad at all and is the basis of a fair deal. The EU have admitted there is room for refining there, so that's where I'd focus my efforts.
Yes, we have a decade more of Brexit discussions to go, and being a semidetached presence could go either way. I reality though our economy, population, culture, history and interests in the world mean that our alignment to Europe will always be very close. Its a pity that we have given up our voice in how things develop, but we will be drawn along in the EU slipstream anyway.
Nope, it will be 2-3 years. Not a decade.
We will have independence in some areas and codependence in others, outside the federal union. I'm comfortable with that.
We shall see, I reckon that Leavers should take note of how much more effectve than us the EU team is. We can only agree quickly, if it is on their terms, and it is unlikely to be concluded in one Parliament. The next government may have other different objectives. We shall adapt to vassalage with barely a whimper.
Of course, all this is contingent on it passing. Government paralysis is very possible.
Nadine Dorries said today that in a vnoc conservative mps would see that if TM won she would be there for another year so 90% (yes 90%) would vote her out !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Is it delusion? Change "another year" to "into the next election" and most MPs will be eyeing their majorities after last time.
We are talking in the context of an immediate vnoc
Indeed but that is the point. The Prime Minister's chance of surviving a vonc depend not just on the Brexit deal but also on how MPs view their prospects if Theresa May leads them into a general election. If I were her, I'd be thinking about a pledge to step down in (say) 2020 in order to remove this factor.
All alternatives poll worse than May
Yes but they've seen May lose seats already. The rest is name recognition and guesswork, and the aggregate un-May beats May.
May got 42%, the highest Tory voteshare since 1983 but in any case if Jesus Christ leads the Tory Party it would make no difference if we get No Deal Brexit and economic Armageddon, Corbyn would become PM regardless
Calmez vous.
I know it’s from Buzzfeed and all, but that article about Mars bar shortages did say that Gove is concerned from his experience as agriculture secretary about food supplies in the event of a No Deal crash out. If that is true it really should make the Brexit headbangers take a pause for thought.
I am wondering though, why current Dover users are tied to that port once it doesn't become a viable option. There are other routes into the country.
But those other ports will also have the same problems, and all the other ships will also be trying all the other ports. The overall speed of ingress will slow, and that results in queues. The problem is not insuperable (and indeed will be solved!) but it takes time and money.
Listening to the phone in following Any Questions and the audience reaction Lord Adonis's solution is attracting attention. Another referendum. "Do you favour Mrs May's plan or to Remain". Simple and easy to understand. I suspect this plan has legs and will be difficult to stop.
Any ideas for a collective noun for the members of the ERG?
A wingnut of ERGs.
The erg has not been a valid unit since 1 January 1978[13] when the EEC ratified a directive of 1971 which implemented the International System (SI)
She screwed up the election just like she has screwed up everything else she has touched. She’s unfit to be PM and if she wasn’t so keen to appease the EU she might have got a deal that was worth having, rather than a deal she is trying to sell now that is worse than no deal. The problem is not with those MPs who have sent in no confidence letters but with the muppets who haven’t.
“Appease”. Listen to yourself. Brexitshire really is the home of halfwits.
So you think it’s a good deal do you. For what possible reason ?
Leaving CFP, leaving CAP, getting rid of FoM, continued ability to trade with Europe with no trade barriers on an ongoing basis, without any ongoing payments...
The European Parliament will probably vote it down.
We could have left the CFP andthe CAP by replicating Norway’s deal. We didn’t need the mess May has concocted to do that. As we don’t know what’s going to replace them and we’ve sold out fisheries twice - when we joined and for the transition, if we get a transition - any benefit is theoretical at this stage and May might well sell fisheries out again together trade deal during the transition. Gove has already said farmers will get equivalent grants to the CAP and May isgoung the common external tariff so I struggle to see what benefits we’ll get from actually being outside the CAP in practice.
Immigration hasn’t been resolved and might well be raised during the trade talks, if we get that far, as part of what May describes as her mobility framework in Chequers.
As trade hasn’t been discussed neither has paying for trade which EEA members make so we have no certainty that future payments will cease that I can see.
The backstop contain the conditions for ongoing trade post transition, until a formal trade deal is agreed. There are no payments involved AFAIK.
Nadine Dorries said today that in a vnoc conservative mps would see that if TM won she would be there for another year so 90% (yes 90%) would vote her out !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Is it delusion? Change "another year" to "into the next election" and most MPs will be eyeing their majorities after last time.
We are talking in the context of an immediate vnoc
Indeed but that is the point. The Prime Minister's chance of surviving a vonc depend not just on the Brexit deal but also on how MPs view their prospects if Theresa May leads them into a general election. If I were her, I'd be thinking about a pledge to step down in (say) 2020 in order to remove this factor.
All alternatives poll worse than May
Yes but they've seen May lose seats already. The rest is name recognition and guesswork, and the aggregate un-May beats May.
May got 42%, the highest Tory voteshare since 1983 but in any case if Jesus Christ leads the Tory Party it would make no difference if we get No Deal Brexit and economic Armageddon, Corbyn would become PM regardless
Calmez vous.
I know it’s from Buzzfeed and all, but that article about Mars bar shortages did say that Gove is concerned from his experience as agriculture secretary about food supplies in the event of a No Deal crash out. If that is true it really should make the Brexit headbangers take a pause for thought.
I am wondering though, why current Dover users are tied to that port once it doesn't become a viable option. There are other routes into the country.
But those other ports will also have the same problems, and all the other ships will also be trying all the other ports. The overall speed of ingress will slow, and that results in queues. The problem is not insuperable (and indeed will be solved!) but it takes time and money.
Spreads the load though. Nobody is saying that nothing will get through Dover. Just that everything going through Dover as it does at present will cause gridlock.
Listening to the phone in following Any Questions and the audience reaction Lord Adonis's solution is attracting attention. Another referendum. "Do you favour Mrs May's plan or to Remain". Simple and easy to understand. I suspect this plan has legs and will be difficult to stop.
Any ideas for a collective noun for the members of the ERG?
A wingnut of ERGs.
The erg has not been a valid unit since 1 January 1978[13] when the EEC ratified a directive of 1971 which implemented the International System (SI)
She screwed up the election just like she has screwed up everything else she has touched. She’s unfit to be PM and if she wasn’t so keen to appease the EU she might have got a deal that was worth having, rather than a deal she is trying to sell now that is worse than no deal. The problem is not with those MPs who have sent in no confidence letters but with the muppets who haven’t.
“Appease”. Listen to yourself. Brexitshire really is the home of halfwits.
So you think it’s a good deal do you. For what possible reason ?
Leaving CFP, leaving CAP, getting rid of FoM, continued ability to trade with Europe with no trade barriers on an ongoing basis, without any ongoing payments...
The European Parliament will probably vote it down.
We could have left the CFP andthe CAP by replicating Norway’s deal. We didn’t need the mess May has concocted to do that. As we don’t know what’s going to replace them and we’ve sold out fisheries twice - when we joined and for the transition, if we get a transition - any benefit is theoretical at this stage and May might well sell fisheries out again together trade deal during the transition. Gove has already said farmers will get equivalent grants to the CAP and May isgoung the common external tariff so I struggle to see what benefits we’ll get from actually being outside the CAP in practice.
Immigration hasn’t been resolved and might well be raised during the trade talks, if we get that far, as part of what May describes as her mobility framework in Chequers.
As trade hasn’t been discussed neither has paying for trade which EEA members make so we have no certainty that future payments will cease that I can see.
The backstop contain the conditions for ongoing trade post transition, until a formal trade deal is agreed. There are no payments involved AFAIK.
The backstop has got all sorts of problems associated with it so I don’t think anyone should be relying on that.
Mail reporting the rebel wingnuts are 11 letters short.
If that's true it's very unlikely there will be a vote at all now.
This is what I hear, too.
If they haven’t got there yet, I don’t think they’re going to get there.
Off to Vienna tomorrow - quite looking forward to being away from the febrile atmosphere for a few days.
A May vs Corbyn rematch at the next election is almost nailed on at this point.
I was really pleasantly surprised at the laughter Labour’s Brexit position was getting on QT on a Thursday. The sitting atop the fence game might finally be up for them.
Listening to the phone in following Any Questions and the audience reaction Lord Adonis's solution is attracting attention. Another referendum. "Do you favour Mrs May's plan or to Remain". Simple and easy to understand. I suspect this plan has legs and will be difficult to stop.
Any ideas for a collective noun for the members of the ERG?
So a referendum giving leavers a choice between a deal they apparently detest and remain. When most of them want no deal or a different deal. Can't see where that might fall down... Not sure even Labour could vote for that given their official policy.
I would recommend Leavers focus on the political declaration for the future long term relationship.
It actually isn't that bad at all and is the basis of a fair deal. The EU have admitted there is room for refining there, so that's where I'd focus my efforts.
Yes, we have a decade more of Brexit discussions to go, and being a semidetached presence could go either way. I reality though our economy, population, culture, history and interests in the world mean that our alignment to Europe will always be very close. Its a pity that we have given up our voice in how things develop, but we will be drawn along in the EU slipstream anyway.
Nope, it will be 2-3 years. Not a decade.
We will have independence in some areas and codependence in others, outside the federal union. I'm comfortable with that.
We shall see, I reckon that Leavers should take note of how much more effectve than us the EU team is. We can only agree quickly, if it is on their terms, and it is unlikely to be concluded in one Parliament. The next government may have other different objectives. We shall adapt to vassalage with barely a whimper.
Of course, all this is contingent on it passing. Government paralysis is very possible.
An ad agency were asked for the purposes of a TV prog to think of a campaign to rehabilitate the Tory party shortly after they had been defeated in 1997. After a week they came back and said they wouldn't be able to accept the brief because the product was beyond repair. I have a feeling that the same will be true of Brexit. Those involved will be seen as irredeemable and they will have to spend the rest of their days in the political wilderness
Doing a bit of light work this afternoon and an email has just popped up on my business account. It's from a company offering cheap stock from Turkey thanks to the fall in the value of the Turkish lira. That should help the Turks with their current cash flow problem. Capitalism is a great system in many ways - generating actions that solve problems very quickly.
So I am not worried about the shelves emptying in the event of a no deal Brexit. But it is a reminder of just how humiliating it would be. Imagine emails like that one going around to potential carpet baggers around the world to take advantage of the weakness of GBP.
I strongly suspect that a CFP which satisfies the bigger fishing organisations will be very unsatisfactory as far as smaller local, and individual, fisherman are concerned. Unless I've totally misunderstood, that was the difficulty which caused the individuals complaints in the first place.
Listening to the phone in following Any Questions and the audience reaction Lord Adonis's solution is attracting attention. Another referendum. "Do you favour Mrs May's plan or to Remain". Simple and easy to understand. I suspect this plan has legs and will be difficult to stop.
Any ideas for a collective noun for the members of the ERG?
A wingnut of ERGs.
The erg has not been a valid unit since 1 January 1978[13] when the EEC ratified a directive of 1971 which implemented the International System (SI)
She screwed up the election just like she has screwed up everything
“Appease”. Listen to yourself. Brexitshire really is the home of halfwits.
So you think it’s a good deal do you. For what possible reason ?
Leaving CFP, leaving CAP, getting rid of FoM, continued ability to trade with Europe with no trade barriers on an ongoing basis, without any ongoing payments...
The European Parliament will probably vote it down.
We could have left the CFP andthe CAP by replicating Norway’s deal. We didn’t need the mess May has concocted to do that. As we don’t know what’s going to replace them and we’ve sold out fisheries twice - when we joined and for the transition, if we get a transition - any benefit is theoretical at this stage and May might well sell fisheries out again together trade deal during the transition. Gove has already said farmers will get equivalent grants to the CAP and May isgoung the common external tariff so I struggle to see what benefits we’ll get from actually being outside the CAP in practice.
Immigration hasn’t been resolved and might well be raised during the trade talks, if we get that far, as part of what May describes as her mobility framework in Chequers.
As trade hasn’t been discussed neither has paying for trade which EEA members make so we have no certainty that future payments will cease that I can see.
The backstop contain the conditions for ongoing trade post transition, until a formal trade deal is agreed. There are no payments involved AFAIK.
The backstop has got all sorts of problems associated with it so I don’t think anyone should be relying on that.
But it avoids a cliff edge. It is an elegant solution that neither party want; which means it is a good position from which to agree a swift trade deal.
Listening to the phone in following Any Questions and the audience reaction Lord Adonis's solution is attracting attention. Another referendum. "Do you favour Mrs May's plan or to Remain". Simple and easy to understand. I suspect this plan has legs and will be difficult to stop.
Any ideas for a collective noun for the members of the ERG?
So a referendum giving leavers a choice between a deal they apparently detest and remain. When most of them want no deal or a different deal. Can't see where that might fall down... Not sure even Labour could vote for that given their official policy.
I would recommend Leavers focus on the political declaration for the future long term relationship.
It actually isn't that bad at all and is the basis of a fair deal. The EU have admitted there is room for refining there, so that's where I'd focus my efforts.
Yes, we have a decade more of Brexit discussions to go, and being a semidetached presence could go either way. I reality though our economy, population, culture, history and interests in the world mean that our alignment to Europe will always be very close. Its a pity that we have given up our voice in how things develop, but we will be drawn along in the EU slipstream anyway.
Nope, it will be 2-3 years. Not a decade.
We will have independence in some areas and codependence in others, outside the federal union. I'm comfortable with that.
We shall see, I reckon that Leavers should take note of how much more effectve than us the EU team is. We can only agree quickly, if it is on their terms, and it is unlikely to be concluded in one Parliament. The next government may have other different objectives. We shall adapt to vassalage with barely a whimper.
Of course, all this is contingent on it passing. Government paralysis is very possible.
An ad agency were asked for the purposes of a TV prog to think of a campaign to rehabilitate the Tory party shortly after they had been defeated in 1997. After a week they came back and said they wouldn't be able to accept the brief because the product was beyond repair. I have a feeling that the same will be true of Brexit. Those involved will be seen as irredeemable and they will have to spend the rest of their days in the political wilderness
The commentariat and political talking heads were adamant that “May’s deal” couldn’t pass the HoC long before anybody even knew what was in it. It isn’t what is in the deal which guarantees or dooms its passage. It is the motives of the people who will vote it down.
No amount of tweaking or “renegotiation” is going to change that.
That's a very astute observation. Does anyone now know what the deal is and what part of it so many find repulsive? I don't and David's excellent header for all it's length doesnt either
Briefly, as I understand it (no I've not read it in full, though I would if I were an MP): * It offers a watered-down version of membership - Remainers prefer membership, Leavers want some benefits * It effectively prevents separate UK trade deals for the forseeable future (Brexiteer eughhh) * It bans new state aid for industry for several years (Corbyn boo hiss) * It concedes sovereignty on when to exit the backstop (Leavers want more control, not less)
I'm coming to think that voting it down in round 1 is pretty certain - as far as I know, there is only one Labour MP who has hinted she might vote for it, and she's hedged it. But an "avoid the cliff edge" second vote is conceivable, perhaps after some token tweaks like a solemn declaration of intent.
Remove the bespoke backstop with reentry. Wins all round, even for Leavers.
How? Many people think a trade deal may not be done in two years. And why would the EU even bother to try? Of course you may take the view that the EU has no incentive to move on from the backstop, so what’s the difference. But I don’t think that’s actually true - the backstop isn’t a realistic permanent solution for either side - people stating it is and complaining that the U.K. is stuck with it doesn’t make it so.
Given they will have UK on a string why will they agree to anything decent on trade, far better to just keep it as a plaything.
Because it divides the four indivisable freedoms and provides us preferential market access without FOM. The risk to them is others will want the same.
It leaves the UK at the whim of the EU, it is the crappiest deal anyone could have thought up, 2 years to come up with that pile of crap. Dire negotiating.
Whats so wrong with it ?
The fact that we are stuck with NI problem and unable to get out otherwise. Plus real key is it stuffs Scotland for any investment by making NI part of Europe and putting us out on our erchies.
Nadine Dorries said today that in a vnoc conservative mps would see that if TM won she would be there for another year so 90% (yes 90%) would vote her out !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Is it delusion? Change "another year" to "into the next election" and most MPs will be eyeing their majorities after last time.
We are talking in the context of an immediate vnoc
Indeed but that is the point. The Prime Minister's chance of surviving a vonc depend not just on the Brexit deal but also on how MPs view their prospects if Theresa May leads them into a general election. If I were her, I'd be thinking about a pledge to step down in (say) 2020 in order to remove this factor.
All alternatives poll worse than May
Yes but they've seen May lose seats already. The rest is name recognition and guesswork, and the aggregate un-May beats May.
May got 42%, the highest Tory voteshare since 1983 but in any case if Jesus Christ leads the Tory Party it would make no difference if we get No Deal Brexit and economic Armageddon, Corbyn would become PM regardless
Calmez vous.
I know it’s from Buzzfeed and all, but that article about Mars bar shortages did say that Gove is concerned from his experience as agriculture secretary about food supplies in the event of a No Deal crash out. If that is true it really should make the Brexit headbangers take a pause for thought.
I am wondering though, why current Dover users are tied to that port once it doesn't become a viable option. There are other routes into the country.
But those other ports will also have the same problems, and all the other ships will also be trying all the other ports. The overall speed of ingress will slow, and that results in queues. The problem is not insuperable (and indeed will be solved!) but it takes time and money.
Spreads the load though. Nobody is saying that nothing will get through Dover. Just that everything going through Dover as it does at present will cause gridlock.
It depends if the space capacity of the other ports offsets the attrited capacity of Dover, assuming that they are not themselves attrited.
Except, politically, it stinks like a rotten kipper. Imagine trying to sell a deal to the public or HoC that ends with automatic reentry to a Union 17 million people voted to leave. Plus the ERG would laugh it out of the house, why would they agree to something like that? They can't be sure that in 2 years time they'd have the power to retrigger A50.
They could call it the hokey cokey clause: if this happened we would literally be in, out, in, out!
Stinks less than backstop. A50 applies to all standard members. There is no added risk for the EU or ERG.
The risk to the ERG is that in 2 years, with politics as unpredicable as it is, there won't be a majority to trigger A50 again. So why would they agree to that?
Are you telling me that in 2020, 4 years after the initial vote, Remain MPs (of whom there is an inbuilt majority) would roll over and agree to trigger A50 again because the negotiations had failed when they would much rather see us back in the Union?
That's why it has no legs, because such a move would look like a remainer stitch-up.
If - and it's still a big if - Theresa survives the ERG's no-confidence shenanigans, then it will amount to an act of self-castration by Rees-Mogg, and he's unlikely to be taken seriously again. With luck we'll never have to endure his silly moon face or grating voice again, and the reputation of yet another Leaver will be in tatters.
Doing a bit of light work this afternoon and an email has just popped up on my business account. It's from a company offering cheap stock from Turkey thanks to the fall in the value of the Turkish lira. That should help the Turks with their current cash flow problem. Capitalism is a great system in many ways - generating actions that solve problems very quickly.
So I am not worried about the shelves emptying in the event of a no deal Brexit. But it is a reminder of just how humiliating it would be. Imagine emails like that one going around to potential carpet baggers around the world to take advantage of the weakness of GBP.
Listening to the phone in following Any Questions and the audience reaction Lord Adonis's solution is attracting attention. Another referendum. "Do you favour Mrs May's plan or to Remain". Simple and easy to understand.
Any ideas for a collective noun for the members of the ERG?
A wingnut of ERGs.
The erg has not been a valid unit since 1 January 1978[13] when the EEC ratified a directive of 1971 which implemented the International System (SI)
She screwed up the election just like she has screwed up everything
“Appease”. Listen to yourself. Brexitshire really is the home of halfwits.
So you think it’s a good deal do you. For what possible reason ?
Leaving CFP, leaving CAP, getting rid of FoM, continued ability to trade with Europe with no trade barriers on an ongoing basis, without any ongoing payments...
The European Parliament will probably vote it down.
We could have left the CFP andthe CAP by replicating Norway’s deal. We didn’t need the mess May has concocted to do that. As we don’t know what’s going to replace them and we’ve sold out fisheries twice - when we joined and for the transition, if we get a transition - any benefit is theoretical at this stage and May might well sell fisheries out again together trade deal during the transition. Gove has already said farmers will get equivalent grants to the CAP and May isgoung the common external tariff so I struggle to see what benefits we’ll get from actually being outside the CAP in practice.
Immigration hasn’t been resolved and might well be raised during the trade talks, if we get that far, as part of what May describes as her mobility framework in Chequers.
As trade hasn’t been discussed neither has paying for trade which EEA members make so we have no certainty that future payments will cease that I can see.
There won’t be a quick trade negotiation. Nothing about the EU is quick and Britain never prepares properly nor stands its ground. Fear of the cliff edge isn’t a good reason to enter into such a one sided deal that does nothing for us. Far better to spend the money preparing for no deal and kick off trade talks with US etc
Listening to the phone in following Any Questions and the audience reaction Lord Adonis's solution is attracting attention. Another referendum. "Do you favour Mrs May's plan or to Remain". Simple and easy to understand. I suspect this plan has legs and will be difficult to stop.
Any ideas for a collective noun for the members of the ERG?
So a referendum giving leavers a choice between a deal they apparently detest and remain. When most of them want no deal or a different deal. Can't see where that might fall down... Not sure even Labour could vote for that given their official policy.
I would recommend Leavers focus on the political declaration for the future long term relationship.
It actually isn't that bad at all and is the basis of a fair deal. The EU have admitted there is room for refining there, so that's where I'd focus my efforts.
Yes, we have a decade more of Brexit discussions to go, and being a semidetached presence could go either way. I reality though our economy, population, culture, history and interests in the world mean that our alignment to Europe will always be very close. Its a pity that we have given up our voice in how things develop, but we will be drawn along in the EU slipstream anyway.
Nope, it will be 2-3 years. Not a decade.
We will have independence in some areas and codependence in others, outside the federal union. I'm comfortable with that.
We shall see, I reckon that Leavers should take note of how much more effectve than us the EU team is. We can only agree quickly, if it is on their terms, and it is unlikely to be concluded in one Parliament. The next government may have other different objectives. We shall adapt to vassalage with barely a whimper.
Of course, all this is contingent on it passing. Government paralysis is very possible.
An ad agency were asked for the purposes of a TV prog to think of a campaign to rehabilitate the Tory party shortly after they had been defeated in 1997. After a week they came back and said they wouldn't be able to accept the brief because the product was beyond repair. I have a feeling that the same will be true of Brexit. Those involved will be seen as irredeemable and they will have to spend the rest of their days in the political wilderness
It took 13 years and Dave Cameron to detoxify the party, and another 5 years to get a majority. He did a pretty convincing job, even I voted Tory in 2010.
It took only a couple of years to retoxify the party though, and I can see that Brexit will retoxify, much as Thatcher did for Scottish Tories for a generation.
Any ideas for a collective noun for the members of the ERG?
A wingnut of ERGs. The erg has not been a valid unit since 1 January 1978[13] when the EEC ratified a directive of 1971 which implemented the International System (SI)
She screwed up the election just like she has screwed up everything
“Appease”. Listen to yourself. Brexitshire really is the home of halfwits.
So you think it’s a good deal do you. For what possible reason ?
Leaving CFP, leaving CAP, getting rid of FoM, continued ability to trade with Europe with no trade barriers on an ongoing basis, without any ongoing payments...
The European Parliament will probably vote it down.
We could have left the CFP andthe CAP by replicating Norway’s deal. We didn’t need the mess May has concocted to do that. As we don’t know what’s going to replace them and we’ve sold out fisheries twice - when we joined and for the transition, if we get a transition - any benefit is theoretical at this stage and May might well sell fisheries out again together trade deal during the transition. Gove has already said farmers will get equivalent grants to the CAP and May isgoung the common external tariff so I struggle to see what benefits we’ll get from actually being outside the CAP in practice.
Immigration hasn’t been resolved and might well be raised during the trade talks, if we get that far, as part of what May describes as her mobility framework in Chequers.
As trade hasn’t been discussed neither has paying for trade which EEA members make so we have no certainty that future payments will cease that I can see.
The backstop contain the conditions for ongoing trade post transition, until a formal trade deal is agreed. There are no payments involved AFAIK.
The backstop has got all sorts of problems associated with it so I don’t think anyone should be relying on that.
But it avoids a cliff edge. It is an elegant solution that neither party want; which means it is a good position from which to agree a swift trade deal.
There won’t be a quick negotiation based on what we’ve seen and fear of the cliffedge isn’t a good reason to enter into such a poor deal. Better to spend the money preparing for no deal.
It's a protest by "Extinction Rebellion", green activists who envisage a possible "mass extinction" but who seem to assume that the financial system will last long enough for the payments they ask supporters to make to their account at a Steinerite bank to clear.
It's a protest by "Extinction Rebellion", green activists who envisage a possible "mass extinction" but who seem to assume that the financial system will last long enough for the payments they ask supporters to make to their account at a Steinerite bank to clear.
It's a protest by "Extinction Rebellion", green activists who envisage a possible "mass extinction" but who seem to assume that the financial system will last long enough for the payments they ask supporters to make to their account at a Steinerite bank to clear.
To return to an issue raised yesterday - why was Chris Huhne treated more severely than Gerald Nabarro?
Did people like Nabarro? That might be one explanation.
He was seen as quite an eccentric figure but that does not explain why the court did not give him a custodial sentence similar to that imposed on Huhne.
To return to an issue raised yesterday - why was Chris Huhne treated more severely than Gerald Nabarro?
Did people like Nabarro? That might be one explanation.
He was seen as quite an eccentric figure but that does not explain why the court did not give him a custodial sentence similar to that imposed on Huhne.
Surely the key point was Huhne had lied and as a result evaded punishment? Whereas Nabarro's story was rejected so he was punished. If everybody who pleaded not guilty in court and told unconvincing lies was jailed for perjury, our jails would burst.
It's a protest by "Extinction Rebellion", green activists who envisage a possible "mass extinction" but who seem to assume that the financial system will last long enough for the payments they ask supporters to make to their account at a Steinerite bank to clear.
To return to an issue raised yesterday - why was Chris Huhne treated more severely than Gerald Nabarro?
Did people like Nabarro? That might be one explanation.
He was seen as quite an eccentric figure but that does not explain why the court did not give him a custodial sentence similar to that imposed on Huhne.
Surely the key point was Huhne had lied and as a result evaded punishment? Whereas Nabarro's story was rejected so he was punished. If everybody who pleaded not guilty in court and told unconvincing lies was jailed for perjury, our jails would burst.
I think his illness was probably also a factor.
Nabarro's illness developed following his conviction. He pleaded not guilty but was disbelieved by the jury. In the end Huhne pleaded guilty.
To return to an issue raised yesterday - why was Chris Huhne treated more severely than Gerald Nabarro?
Did people like Nabarro? That might be one explanation.
He was seen as quite an eccentric figure but that does not explain why the court did not give him a custodial sentence similar to that imposed on Huhne.
Surely the key point was Huhne had lied and as a result evaded punishment? Whereas Nabarro's story was rejected so he was punished. If everybody who pleaded not guilty in court and told unconvincing lies was jailed for perjury, our jails would burst.
I think his illness was probably also a factor.
Nabarro's illness developed following his conviction. He pleaded not guilty but was disbelieved by the jury. In the end Huhne pleaded guilty.
I think you're confusing two issues. Nabarro was prosecuted for dangerous driving, told a story that was not believed, found guilty and sentenced for that crime. He did appeal later, while ill, and his conviction was quashed. Huhne falsified a document to avoid a penalty, was caught and was prosecuted for that. Not for the original driving offence.
To return to an issue raised yesterday - why was Chris Huhne treated more severely than Gerald Nabarro?
Did people like Nabarro? That might be one explanation.
He was seen as quite an eccentric figure but that does not explain why the court did not give him a custodial sentence similar to that imposed on Huhne.
Surely the key point was Huhne had lied and as a result evaded punishment? Whereas Nabarro's story was rejected so he was punished. If everybody who pleaded not guilty in court and told unconvincing lies was jailed for perjury, our jails would burst.
I think his illness was probably also a factor.
Nabarro's illness developed following his conviction. He pleaded not guilty but was disbelieved by the jury. In the end Huhne pleaded guilty.
I think you're confusing two issues. Nabarro was prosecuted for dangerous driving, told a story that was not believed, found guilty and sentenced for that crime. He did appeal later, while ill, and his conviction was quashed. Huhne falsified a document to avoid a penalty, was caught and was prosecuted for that. Not for the original driving offence.
To return to an issue raised yesterday - why was Chris Huhne treated more severely than Gerald Nabarro?
Did people like Nabarro? That might be one explanation.
He was seen as quite an eccentric figure but that does not explain why the court did not give him a custodial sentence similar to that imposed on Huhne.
Surely the key point was Huhne had lied and as a result evaded punishment? Whereas Nabarro's story was rejected so he was punished. If everybody who pleaded not guilty in court and told unconvincing lies was jailed for perjury, our jails would burst.
I think his illness was probably also a factor.
Nabarro's illness developed following his conviction. He pleaded not guilty but was disbelieved by the jury. In the end Huhne pleaded guilty.
I think you're confusing two issues. Nabarro was prosecuted for dangerous driving, told a story that was not believed, found guilty and sentenced for that crime. He did appeal later, while ill, and his conviction was quashed. Huhne falsified a document to avoid a penalty, was caught and was prosecuted for that. Not for the original driving offence.
James Forsythe says there is only one way for Mrs May to break the link between how she has handled Brexit so far and the issue of what Parliament should do now. "She [May] should say that as soon as the withdrawal legislation is through the Commons, she will stand down as Prime Minister. This would enable MPs to vote for the deal without that being an endorsement of her handling of Brexit or an invitation for her to negotiate the next stage of Brexit, the UK/EU trade deal." https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/brexit/7762268/pm-should-stand-down-after-brexit-james-forsyth/
She screwed up the election just like she has screwed up everything
snip
There won’t be a quick negotiation based on what we’ve seen and fear of the cliffedge isn’t a good reason to enter into such a poor deal. Better to spend the money preparing for no deal.
----------
Have to agree with the last point.
MrsMay's 'deal' is in two parts: The legally binding WA (585p) and the bit of non binding flannel (14p ¬ yet finished) known as the Future Relationship containing various possibilities for a future trade deal.
When Mogg called her out in the Commons he listed WA articles where her promises were contradicted. Her response was 'Consider the Future Relationship'.. and went on to list as achievements eg leaving CAP, CF, FoM etc things that she has specifically NOT got agreement to.
She's a fucking charlatan.
Mogg&Co are doing exactly the right thing in making clear the size of the committed opposition. I kind of hope they leave her twisting in the wind with 40 letters and thus paralyse the executive power.
Obviously a Brexit PM would be better but this HoC is never going to allow that.
To return to an issue raised yesterday - why was Chris Huhne treated more severely than Gerald Nabarro?
Did people like Nabarro? That might be one explanation.
He was seen as quite an eccentric figure but that does not explain why the court did not give him a custodial sentence similar to that imposed on Huhne.
He was seen as a faintly ludicrous figure... Parodied in the radio and tv comedy of the time. He was the Michael Fabricant of 1971, with even more ridiculous hair (admittedly on his face, not scalp)
Comments
We shall adapt to vassalage with barely a whimper.
Of course, all this is contingent on it passing. Government paralysis is very possible.
If they haven’t got there yet, I don’t think they’re going to get there.
Off to Vienna tomorrow - quite looking forward to being away from the febrile atmosphere for a few days.
So I am not worried about the shelves emptying in the event of a no deal Brexit. But it is a reminder of just how humiliating it would be. Imagine emails like that one going around to potential carpet baggers around the world to take advantage of the weakness of GBP.
Except, politically, it stinks like a rotten kipper. Imagine trying to sell a deal to the public or HoC that ends with automatic reentry to a Union 17 million people voted to leave. Plus the ERG would laugh it out of the house, why would they agree to something like that? They can't be sure that in 2 years time they'd have the power to retrigger A50.
They could call it the hokey cokey clause: if this happened we would literally be in, out, in, out!
Stinks less than backstop. A50 applies to all standard members. There is no added risk for the EU or ERG.
The risk to the ERG is that in 2 years, with politics as unpredicable as it is, there won't be a majority to trigger A50 again. So why would they agree to that?
Are you telling me that in 2020, 4 years after the initial vote, Remain MPs (of whom there is an inbuilt majority) would roll over and agree to trigger A50 again because the negotiations had failed when they would much rather see us back in the Union?
That's why it has no legs, because such a move would look like a remainer stitch-up.
If the ERG cannot gwt the 48 letters they'll be seen as a minor group of windbags.
It took only a couple of years to retoxify the party though, and I can see that Brexit will retoxify, much as Thatcher did for Scottish Tories for a generation.
A wingnut of ERGs.
The erg has not been a valid unit since 1 January 1978[13] when the EEC ratified a directive of 1971 which implemented the International System (SI)
She screwed up the election just like she has screwed up everything
“Appease”. Listen to yourself. Brexitshire really is the home of halfwits.
So you think it’s a good deal do you. For what possible reason ?
Leaving CFP, leaving CAP, getting rid of FoM, continued ability to trade with Europe with no trade barriers on an ongoing basis, without any ongoing payments...
The European Parliament will probably vote it down.
We could have left the CFP andthe CAP by replicating Norway’s deal. We didn’t need the mess May has concocted to do that. As we don’t know what’s going to replace them and we’ve sold out fisheries twice - when we joined and for the transition, if we get a transition - any benefit is theoretical at this stage and May might well sell fisheries out again together trade deal during the transition. Gove has already said farmers will get equivalent grants to the CAP and May isgoung the common external tariff so I struggle to see what benefits we’ll get from actually being outside the CAP in practice.
Immigration hasn’t been resolved and might well be raised during the trade talks, if we get that far, as part of what May describes as her mobility framework in Chequers.
As trade hasn’t been discussed neither has paying for trade which EEA members make so we have no certainty that future payments will cease that I can see.
The backstop contain the conditions for ongoing trade post transition, until a formal trade deal is agreed. There are no payments involved AFAIK.
The backstop has got all sorts of problems associated with it so I don’t think anyone should be relying on that.
But it avoids a cliff edge. It is an elegant solution that neither party want; which means it is a good position from which to agree a swift trade deal.
There won’t be a quick negotiation based on what we’ve seen and fear of the cliffedge isn’t a good reason to enter into such a poor deal. Better to spend the money preparing for no deal.
What's the symbol that some of them are displaying on flags?
I think his illness was probably also a factor.
"She [May] should say that as soon as the withdrawal legislation is through the Commons, she will stand down as Prime Minister. This would enable MPs to vote for the deal without that being an endorsement of her handling of Brexit or an invitation for her to negotiate the next stage of Brexit, the UK/EU trade deal."
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/brexit/7762268/pm-should-stand-down-after-brexit-james-forsyth/
She screwed up the election just like she has screwed up everything
snip
There won’t be a quick negotiation based on what we’ve seen and fear of the cliffedge isn’t a good reason to enter into such a poor deal. Better to spend the money preparing for no deal.
----------
Have to agree with the last point.
MrsMay's 'deal' is in two parts: The legally binding WA (585p) and the bit of non binding flannel (14p ¬ yet finished) known as the Future Relationship containing various possibilities for a future trade deal.
When Mogg called her out in the Commons he listed WA articles where her promises were contradicted. Her response was 'Consider the Future Relationship'.. and went on to list as achievements eg leaving CAP, CF, FoM etc things that she has specifically NOT got agreement to.
She's a fucking charlatan.
Mogg&Co are doing exactly the right thing in making clear the size of the committed opposition. I kind of hope they leave her twisting in the wind with 40 letters and thus paralyse the executive power.
Obviously a Brexit PM would be better but this HoC is never going to allow that.