I feel like May is daring them to do it at this point - win or lose it would be better for the country as it removes at least one immediate uncertainty, even though it doesn't make her deal more passable or another deal any easier or harder.
Even if May is challenged I expect she would get a similar result to that Major got against Redwood in 1995 ie 218 MPs (66%) behind the PM, 89 MPs (27%) voting to topple the PM
Even if May is challenged I expect she would get a similar result to that Major got against Redwood in 1995 ie 218 MPs (66%) behind the PM, 89 MPs (27%) voting to topple the PM
Difficult to see how May can carry on if she loses the vote on her Brexit bill regardless of whether or not there is a no confidence vote. She’ll have no credibility having totally abandoned domestic policy to deliver a flagship deal even a majority of MPs, who are predominantly Remainers, reject. As we saw in the last election, she is an electoral liability when it comes to campaigning and policy formulation.
On the other hand, if the ERG can’t even muster 48 letters and there are Tory MPs lying about having sent in letters, she might not lose her Brexit bill, even if it is nothing more than a surrender document.
Such a shame Brady doesnt publish the list of whose letters he has so we can all see who the liars are.
On topic if the ERG can't find 48 votes to trigger a VoNC how do they expect to find 159 to win one?
It seems to me that May remaining is a no brainer. The only way I can see her leaving would be if she were persuaded that that was the price of the deal passing and I am really struggling to find a scenario where that could arise.
Is Sir Graham even going to vote for May's deal - he doesn't seem entirely happy with it either? If he thinks the deal is 'highly unlikely' to pass and is willing to say so publicly isn't that a bit of a problem?
'But as a Brexiter, he suggested the deal as currently drafted looks highly unlikely to secure a majority in the House of Commons, and he hopes the final political declaration about Britain’s future trading relationship - to be hammered out over the next few days, “gives considerably stronger grounds for optimism about the final nature of the deal”.'
Difficult to see how May can carry on if she loses the vote on her Brexit bill regardless of whether or not there is a no confidence vote. She’ll have no credibility having totally abandoned domestic policy to deliver a flagship deal even a majority of MPs, who are predominantly Remainers, reject. As we saw in the last election, she is an electoral liability when it comes to campaigning and policy formulation.
On the other hand, if the ERG can’t even muster 48 letters and there are Tory MPs lying about having sent in letters, she might not lose her Brexit bill, even if it is nothing more than a surrender document.
Such a shame Brady doesnt publish the list of whose letters he has so we can all see who the liars are.
Oh I don't think you need to worry about the deal getting through, it needs a lot fewer than 48 rebels to scupper than and it definitely has more than that given the regulars and the ministerial resignations (and probably the gutless five if they doni't get changes).
Not sure it is a shame about not publishing the list of letters - if a vote is not triggered it would be annoying that it was leaked for so long that they were so close and just about to do it, and very annoying if people have been lying, but there's no alternative as it is surely unreasonable to publish a list if the threshold is never reached, since it is an internal party matter, technically.
Despite not being able to score, England are playing some lovely football. While the focus is all on sir waistcoat, one guy who gets no credit outside of those in the game, Steve Holland. Quietly gone from Crewe academy manager through coaching ranks of Chelsea and now England.
Honestly, I still struggle to believe they have not or could not reach 48, and I think it is in their and the country's best interests to have a vote whatever the outcome, but that is some real weaksauce stuff.
Difficult to see how May can carry on if she loses the vote on her Brexit bill regardless of whether or not there is a no confidence vote. She’ll have no credibility having totally abandoned domestic policy to deliver a flagship deal even a majority of MPs, who are predominantly Remainers, reject. As we saw in the last election, she is an electoral liability when it comes to campaigning and policy formulation.
On the other hand, if the ERG can’t even muster 48 letters and there are Tory MPs lying about having sent in letters, she might not lose her Brexit bill, even if it is nothing more than a surrender document.
Such a shame Brady doesnt publish the list of whose letters he has so we can all see who the liars are.
Oh I don't think you need to worry about the deal getting through, it needs a lot fewer than 48 rebels to scupper than and it definitely has more than that given the regulars and the ministerial resignations (and probably the gutless five if they doni't get changes).
Not sure it is a shame about not publishing the list of letters - if a vote is not triggered it would be annoying that it was leaked for so long that they were so close and just about to do it, and very annoying if people have been lying, but there's no alternative as it is surely unreasonable to publish a list if the threshold is never reached, since it is an internal party matter, technically.
Maybe, but if my MP was claiming to have sent a letter of no confidence in and was lying I would want to know.
May should suspend an extra couple (of ERGers), just for a laugh. If she can work out which ones have actually submitted letters.
Excellent stuff - she can wait for the challenge to come, suspend all her critics from the party, then they can have a court case about how the party's internal procedures have not been followed properly, that'll give her time to get to the EU summit at least.
Honestly, I still struggle to believe they have not or could not reach 48, and I think it is in their and the country's best interests to have a vote whatever the outcome, but that is some real weaksauce stuff.
Not a chicken stock. Not a beef stock. Definitely a laughing stock if they can't pull this off.
On topic if the ERG can't find 48 votes to trigger a VoNC how do they expect to find 159 to win one?
It seems to me that May remaining is a no brainer. The only way I can see her leaving would be if she were persuaded that that was the price of the deal passing and I am really struggling to find a scenario where that could arise.
Am I the only person who thinks winning 160 votes in a VoNC wouldn't represent a firm affirmation of the Prime Minister's authority?
The ERG won't win - they know that - but they can and will wound whether people vote with them or abstain. I've always said she needs 200 votes to continue - less than that and while she can survive, to all practical purposes she won't.
Even now there is a declared faction within her Cabinet that is looking to change the Deal. The extent to which her authority has disintegrated is she can do nothing about this.
A strong and confident leader would sack Leadsom, Gove and the others but she can't do that.
Honestly, I still struggle to believe they have not or could not reach 48, and I think it is in their and the country's best interests to have a vote whatever the outcome, but that is some real weaksauce stuff.
Not a chicken stock. Not a beef stock. Definitely a laughing stock if they can't pull this off.
The thing is I know, I just know, that some ERGer out there is going to get all uppity when they do get to the 48, and be all 'Oh hey, I guess all those people mocking us for not being able to get to 48 were wrong, huh?', when personally getting there is I would incidental, the long term moaning without action, the constant threats, the repeated statements of being almost there of over the line, combine to make it mock worthy regardless if they do, as I would expect, get to the 48 eventually. It's certainly on a level of competence with May's premiership at the least.
On topic if the ERG can't find 48 votes to trigger a VoNC how do they expect to find 159 to win one?
It seems to me that May remaining is a no brainer. The only way I can see her leaving would be if she were persuaded that that was the price of the deal passing and I am really struggling to find a scenario where that could arise.
Am I the only person who thinks winning 160 votes in a VoNC wouldn't represent a firm affirmation of the Prime Minister's authority?
The ERG won't win - they know that - but they can and will wound whether people vote with them or abstain. I've always said she needs 200 votes to continue - less than that and while she can survive, to all practical purposes she won't.
Even now there is a declared faction within her Cabinet that is looking to change the Deal. The extent to which her authority has disintegrated is she can do nothing about this.
A strong and confident leader would sack Leadsom, Gove and the others but she can't do that.
Didn't stop Corbyn (although given how freely I am comparing him to May perhaps she should be worried).
I think her real problem though is that she's running out of replacements.
On topic if the ERG can't find 48 votes to trigger a VoNC how do they expect to find 159 to win one?
It seems to me that May remaining is a no brainer. The only way I can see her leaving would be if she were persuaded that that was the price of the deal passing and I am really struggling to find a scenario where that could arise.
Am I the only person who thinks winning 160 votes in a VoNC wouldn't represent a firm affirmation of the Prime Minister's authority?
The ERG won't win - they know that - but they can and will wound whether people vote with them or abstain. I've always said she needs 200 votes to continue - less than that and while she can survive, to all practical purposes she won't.
Even now there is a declared faction within her Cabinet that is looking to change the Deal. The extent to which her authority has disintegrated is she can do nothing about this.
A strong and confident leader would sack Leadsom, Gove and the others but she can't do that.
Under normal circumstances I would agree with you but these are not normal circumstances. We are going to face a series of difficult and binary choices in the near future. One of those may be should Mrs May be left in charge of the negotiations? Yes or no, no prevarication allowed. In the longer term when we can draw breath we will be looking for a better and more considered choice but for me Sir Graham's comments are spot on: now is not the time.
On topic if the ERG can't find 48 votes to trigger a VoNC how do they expect to find 159 to win one?
It seems to me that May remaining is a no brainer. The only way I can see her leaving would be if she were persuaded that that was the price of the deal passing and I am really struggling to find a scenario where that could arise.
Am I the only person who thinks winning 160 votes in a VoNC wouldn't represent a firm affirmation of the Prime Minister's authority?
The ERG won't win - they know that - but they can and will wound whether people vote with them or abstain. I've always said she needs 200 votes to continue - less than that and while she can survive, to all practical purposes she won't.
Even now there is a declared faction within her Cabinet that is looking to change the Deal. The extent to which her authority has disintegrated is she can do nothing about this.
A strong and confident leader would sack Leadsom, Gove and the others but she can't do that.
Not at all, I think all those points are correct. I certainly don't think she would be safe through winning a contest, just because under the procedures she could not be challenged in the same way for a year, as the entire cabinet could resign and others refuse to serve just to pick one example.
Her authority is already gone, not least because she is being openly contradicted by her Cabinet, and most of the rest are in hiding and preparing theire 'I did not vote to bring May down, wink wink, but with her gone I now put myself forward as leader' speeches.
So I don't think it is about restoring May's authority at all, or even necessarily, for the ERG, winning the vote. It's about showing the strengths of the various factions. Those voting against May will include more than just the ERG, so will reveal the number against the deal probably and possibly a few more. Since we already know that will be enough to vote down the deal I don't see why that means it won't go before parliament, so I think it is setting out those numbers so that once her deal is voted down, and she then resigns as I expect, all in the parliamentary party have an idea how many core loyalists there are, how many no dealers and new dealers combined, etc.
On topic if the ERG can't find 48 votes to trigger a VoNC how do they expect to find 159 to win one?
It seems to me that May remaining is a no brainer. The only way I can see her leaving would be if she were persuaded that that was the price of the deal passing and I am really struggling to find a scenario where that could arise.
Am I the only person who thinks winning 160 votes in a VoNC wouldn't represent a firm affirmation of the Prime Minister's authority?
The ERG won't win - they know that - but they can and will wound whether people vote with them or abstain. I've always said she needs 200 votes to continue - less than that and while she can survive, to all practical purposes she won't.
Even now there is a declared faction within her Cabinet that is looking to change the Deal. The extent to which her authority has disintegrated is she can do nothing about this.
A strong and confident leader would sack Leadsom, Gove and the others but she can't do that.
Didn't stop Corbyn (although given how freely I am comparing him to May perhaps she should be worried).
I think her real problem though is that she's running out of replacements.
Brady is playing a shrewd game. By turning up on the airwaves with his comments he is trying to let air out of the balloon so it doesn't go up.
I was wondering something similar.
Then again, perhaps it's just a response to Baker claiming he has 48 letters already, and the increasingly irritable whispers from the loons about why no VonC has been announced.
On topic if the ERG can't find 48 votes to trigger a VoNC how do they expect to find 159 to win one?
It seems to me that May remaining is a no brainer. The only way I can see her leaving would be if she were persuaded that that was the price of the deal passing and I am really struggling to find a scenario where that could arise.
Am I the only person who thinks winning 160 votes in a VoNC wouldn't represent a firm affirmation of the Prime Minister's authority?
The ERG won't win - they know that - but they can and will wound whether people vote with them or abstain. I've always said she needs 200 votes to continue - less than that and while she can survive, to all practical purposes she won't.
Even now there is a declared faction within her Cabinet that is looking to change the Deal. The extent to which her authority has disintegrated is she can do nothing about this.
A strong and confident leader would sack Leadsom, Gove and the others but she can't do that.
Didn't stop Corbyn (although given how freely I am comparing him to May perhaps she should be worried).
I think her real problem though is that she's running out of replacements.
He wasn't trying to run a government at the time
He was giving every indication of being unable to run a piss up in a brewery.
Some of the ERG are so thick they don't understand that the Transition period (retaining all the benefits of the EU for a time limited period) is something that the British Govt requested and the EU conceded. I've found some people claiming it is "indefinite" because the document says we can request it to be extended once until "20XX" (interpreting this to be 2099). The fact that it (an extension) is something that we are obliged to request hasn't stopped them assuming it is a surrender to EU demands. If they don't understand the basic difference between the transition period (a UK request and an EU concession) and the Backstop, then what hope is there that there will ever be a deal that satisfies them? None whatsoever.
OK, so this is Nadine Dorries, but we all knew that...
The best result in the vote of no confidence is if Mrs May won 52% to 48%.
The ERG would accept that's an overwhelming mandate for her.
Reminds me of Pratchett's joke that the odds had to be a million to one for it to come off. Any less and you had no chance.
Sadly reality does not ascribe so well to the theory of narrative causality. If it did a plucky hero would be emerging right now to lead us out of this chaos.
The best result in the vote of no confidence is if Mrs May won 52% to 48%.
The ERG would accept that's an overwhelming mandate for her.
Reminds me of Pratchett's joke that the odds had to be a million to one for it to come off. Any less and you had no chance.
Sadly reality does not ascribe so well to the theory of narrative causality. If it did a plucky hero would be emerging right now to lead us out of this chaos.
Would have been a surprise for her to have said anything else. She hasn’t got her surrender document on Brexit through Parliament, she has her own MPs in outright rebellion and she is totally inept at campaigning as we saw in the last election.
Under normal circumstances I would agree with you but these are not normal circumstances. We are going to face a series of difficult and binary choices in the near future. One of those may be should Mrs May be left in charge of the negotiations? Yes or no, no prevarication allowed. In the longer term when we can draw breath we will be looking for a better and more considered choice but for me Sir Graham's comments are spot on: now is not the time.
Is the problem not the negotiation rather than the negotiator?
The EU have made it clear the WA is their "offer" and there's no appetite for a fundamental re-negotiation. I found the WA a tough read but clearly others have found some significant problems with it and it is much nearer BINO than some who wanted us to leave expected or wanted.
So there's the negotiation of now to get the WA in place to prevent us crashing out on 29/3/19 and the negotiation to come which ensures everything is in place so Transition ends on 31/12/20 and we fully exit the EU with no residual obligations or responsibilities.
Would have been a surprise for her to have said anything else. She hasn’t got get surrender document on Brexit through, she has her own MPs in outright rebellion and she is totally inept at campaigning as we saw in the last election.
You clearly didn’t click the link...as you missed the gag.
Would have been a surprise for her to have said anything else. She hasn’t got get surrender document on Brexit through, she has her own MPs in outright rebellion and she is totally inept at campaigning as we saw in the last election.
You clearly didn’t click the link...as you missed the gag.
I agree with the header - the ERG aren't a busted flush when it comes to the vote on the deal, but they are apparently exactly that with regard to replacing May. We should know for sure this week.
Gary Streeter's idea (last thread) of a referendum between May's deal and Remain deserves attention - I can see it getting a majority in the Commons, as it brings together all the Remainers plus all the May loyalists. It would infuriate the ERG, but everything infuriates them, so no loss. It would be an interesting test of the theory that Corbyn is a secret Brexiter, since he and everyone else would need to choose between Remain and Just Outside. It would recognise the reality that full-on Brexit just isn't possible unless we accept massive disruption and/or a hard Irish border. But more to the point, it could actually resolve the issue.
Would have been a surprise for her to have said anything else. She hasn’t got her surrender document on Brexit through Parliament, she has her own MPs in outright rebellion and she is totally inept at campaigning as we saw in the last election.
Maybe we could dispatch her to Israel to try and agree a deal with the Palestinians. Given her mastery in such things she would probably have conceded half Israel's territory within a few weeks in return for frictionless trade of goods across the Israel/PA border.
I agree with the header - the ERG aren't a busted flush when it comes to the vote on the deal, but they are apparently exactly that with regard to replacing May. We should know for sure this week.
Gary Streeter's idea (last thread) of a referendum between May's deal and Remain deserves attention - I can see it getting a majority in the Commons, as it brings together all the Remainers plus all the May loyalists. It would infuriate the ERG, but everything infuriates them, so no loss. It would be an interesting test of the theory that Corbyn is a secret Brexiter, since he and everyone else would need to choose between Remain and Just Outside. It would recognise the reality that full-on Brexit just isn't possible unless we accept massive disruption and/or a hard Irish border. But more to the point, it could actually resolve the issue.
I agree with the header - the ERG aren't a busted flush when it comes to the vote on the deal, but they are apparently exactly that with regard to replacing May. We should know for sure this week.
Gary Streeter's idea (last thread) of a referendum between May's deal and Remain deserves attention - I can see it getting a majority in the Commons, as it brings together all the Remainers plus all the May loyalists. It would infuriate the ERG, but everything infuriates them, so no loss. It would be an interesting test of the theory that Corbyn is a secret Brexiter, since he and everyone else would need to choose between Remain and Just Outside. It would recognise the reality that full-on Brexit just isn't possible unless we accept massive disruption and/or a hard Irish border. But more to the point, it could actually resolve the issue.
I doubt it would resolve things within either Party unless there was a clear-cut win for one side or the other. What would "Remain" mean for example - would we return to the status quo ante bellum (so to speak) so in effect our EU membership as is or would it represent any tacit acceptance of deeper integration down the line?
I fail to see how going back to the unsatisfactory position that caused the referendum will suddenly make everyone satisfied.
Oh FFS...you knew this was coming...looks like England will be playing the likes of Faroe Islands in the next nations league.
Same old, same old.
Well to be fair until then England have played some lovely football, which they haven’t been able to do for many many years.
To be fair, I'm by no means the worlds most devoted football fan; go every so often to watch our local (very) lower league side, and my granddaughters in their seven-a-side league but that's about it.
I agree with the header - the ERG aren't a busted flush when it comes to the vote on the deal, but they are apparently exactly that with regard to replacing May. We should know for sure this week.
Gary Streeter's idea (last thread) of a referendum between May's deal and Remain deserves attention - I can see it getting a majority in the Commons, as it brings together all the Remainers plus all the May loyalists. It would infuriate the ERG, but everything infuriates them, so no loss. It would be an interesting test of the theory that Corbyn is a secret Brexiter, since he and everyone else would need to choose between Remain and Just Outside. It would recognise the reality that full-on Brexit just isn't possible unless we accept massive disruption and/or a hard Irish border. But more to the point, it could actually resolve the issue.
I doubt it would resolve things within either Party unless there was a clear-cut win for one side or the other. What would "Remain" mean for example - would we return to the status quo ante bellum (so to speak) so in effect our EU membership as is or would it represent any tacit acceptance of deeper integration down the line?
I fail to see how going back to the unsatisfactory position that caused the referendum will suddenly make everyone satisfied.
So how would you propose to define a "satisfactory" position, and how would we get to it?
I agree with the header - the ERG aren't a busted flush when it comes to the vote on the deal, but they are apparently exactly that with regard to replacing May. We should know for sure this week.
Gary Streeter's idea (last thread) of a referendum between May's deal and Remain deserves attention - I can see it getting a majority in the Commons, as it brings together all the Remainers plus all the May loyalists. It would infuriate the ERG, but everything infuriates them, so no loss. It would be an interesting test of the theory that Corbyn is a secret Brexiter, since he and everyone else would need to choose between Remain and Just Outside. It would recognise the reality that full-on Brexit just isn't possible unless we accept massive disruption and/or a hard Irish border. But more to the point, it could actually resolve the issue.
So you would have a second referendum proposed by the Tories which possibly the majority of their activists and potentially many of their voters would abstain in as they cannot support either option. I can see why Labour would favour that but it would surely create a backlash if you didn't offer no deal as well.
I agree with the header - the ERG aren't a busted flush when it comes to the vote on the deal, but they are apparently exactly that with regard to replacing May. We should know for sure this week.
Gary Streeter's idea (last thread) of a referendum between May's deal and Remain deserves attention - I can see it getting a majority in the Commons, as it brings together all the Remainers plus all the May loyalists. It would infuriate the ERG, but everything infuriates them, so no loss. It would be an interesting test of the theory that Corbyn is a secret Brexiter, since he and everyone else would need to choose between Remain and Just Outside. It would recognise the reality that full-on Brexit just isn't possible unless we accept massive disruption and/or a hard Irish border. But more to the point, it could actually resolve the issue.
So you would have a second referendum proposed by the Tories which the majority of their activists and potentially many of their voters would abstain in as they cannot support either option. I can see why Labour would favour that but it would surely create a backlash if you didn't offer no deal as well.
It couldn't be proposed by the Tories, but maybe it could be the choice of parliament.
As I've said before, starting from here all options are impossible. It's just a question of finding the least impossible. (FWIW I think that might still be the deal that is on the table, together with a stronger declaration on the final relationship).
Some of the ERG are so thick they don't understand that the Transition period (retaining all the benefits of the EU for a time limited period) is something that the British Govt requested and the EU conceded. I've found some people claiming it is "indefinite" because the document says we can request it to be extended once until "20XX" (interpreting this to be 2099). The fact that it (an extension) is something that we are obliged to request hasn't stopped them assuming it is a surrender to EU demands. If they don't understand the basic difference between the transition period (a UK request and an EU concession) and the Backstop, then what hope is there that there will ever be a deal that satisfies them? None whatsoever.
OK, so this is Nadine Dorries, but we all knew that...
The majority of opposition to the WA is founded on misapprehension and misunderstanding.
Ffs is took a few hours to read on the night it was published. I’m disappointed that more pols haven’t read it.
Some of the ERG are so thick they don't understand that the Transition period (retaining all the benefits of the EU for a time limited period) is something that the British Govt requested and the EU conceded. I've found some people claiming it is "indefinite" because the document says we can request it to be extended once until "20XX" (interpreting this to be 2099). The fact that it (an extension) is something that we are obliged to request hasn't stopped them assuming it is a surrender to EU demands. If they don't understand the basic difference between the transition period (a UK request and an EU concession) and the Backstop, then what hope is there that there will ever be a deal that satisfies them? None whatsoever.
OK, so this is Nadine Dorries, but we all knew that...
What happens if they screw the dummies over in trade deal and want unrealistic concessions , how does UK get out of that. That is for sure the likely scenario.
I agree with the header - the ERG aren't a busted flush when it comes to the vote on the deal, but they are apparently exactly that with regard to replacing May. We should know for sure this week.
Gary Streeter's idea (last thread) of a referendum between May's deal and Remain deserves attention - I can see it getting a majority in the Commons, as it brings together all the Remainers plus all the May loyalists. It would infuriate the ERG, but everything infuriates them, so no loss. It would be an interesting test of the theory that Corbyn is a secret Brexiter, since he and everyone else would need to choose between Remain and Just Outside. It would recognise the reality that full-on Brexit just isn't possible unless we accept massive disruption and/or a hard Irish border. But more to the point, it could actually resolve the issue.
I doubt it would resolve things within either Party unless there was a clear-cut win for one side or the other. What would "Remain" mean for example - would we return to the status quo ante bellum (so to speak) so in effect our EU membership as is or would it represent any tacit acceptance of deeper integration down the line?
I fail to see how going back to the unsatisfactory position that caused the referendum will suddenly make everyone satisfied.
Surely if we are going to have another referendum then we will need to extend the leaving date beyond the end of March as there won't be enough time, at which point when we're asking for the extension we also ask the EU what "remaining" would actually mean.
The Labour leadership has spent many months skilfully, if cynically, ... pretending that it could negotiate all the benefits of membership of the EU while still leaving. We all know this is tripe. For the moment, Labour is just about hanging together around rejection of Mrs May’s deal. This is the common point that can still unite Mr Corbyn, his Remainer MPs and Labour members. The leadership will vote against the deal because it is a “Tory Brexit” and they think that combining with the Moggites in the division lobbies to defeat the government will somehow precipitate an early general election. Remainer Labour MPs will vote against the deal in the hope that doing so will pave the way to a further referendum. But if Mrs May’s deal goes down and there isn’t a general election, then what? There will be no hiding places left for the Labour leadership. Mr Corbyn will be confronted with the choice that he has been desperate to avoid.
Theresa May has made her choices. For others, the agonising has only just begun. It will soon be time for everyone else to take responsibility for fateful decisions of their own.
Mr. B, I'm reading it not writing it, you tinker, you.
I've just finished the first tablet. The moral of which seems to be that men can be tamed by naked women, and a man without a friend is a bit of a git.
Comments
Except insofar as the ERG are not only completely impotent but all look like massive dicks.
https://twitter.com/MailSport/status/1064163856174538753
(I do my best to help)
I was tempted to say the ERG are like Mark Reckless without the defecting to UKIP.
On the other hand, if the ERG can’t even muster 48 letters and there are Tory MPs lying about having sent in letters, she might not lose her Brexit bill, even if it is nothing more than a surrender document.
Such a shame Brady doesnt publish the list of whose letters he has so we can all see who the liars are.
It seems to me that May remaining is a no brainer. The only way I can see her leaving would be if she were persuaded that that was the price of the deal passing and I am really struggling to find a scenario where that could arise.
'But as a Brexiter, he suggested the deal as currently drafted looks highly unlikely to secure a majority in the House of Commons, and he hopes the final political declaration about Britain’s future trading relationship - to be hammered out over the next few days, “gives considerably stronger grounds for optimism about the final nature of the deal”.'
Not sure it is a shame about not publishing the list of letters - if a vote is not triggered it would be annoying that it was leaked for so long that they were so close and just about to do it, and very annoying if people have been lying, but there's no alternative as it is surely unreasonable to publish a list if the threshold is never reached, since it is an internal party matter, technically.
The ERG won't win - they know that - but they can and will wound whether people vote with them or abstain. I've always said she needs 200 votes to continue - less than that and while she can survive, to all practical purposes she won't.
Even now there is a declared faction within her Cabinet that is looking to change the Deal. The extent to which her authority has disintegrated is she can do nothing about this.
A strong and confident leader would sack Leadsom, Gove and the others but she can't do that.
Will his approach succeed? Who knows.
I think her real problem though is that she's running out of replacements.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-46238525
The ERG would accept that's an overwhelming mandate for her.
Her authority is already gone, not least because she is being openly contradicted by her Cabinet, and most of the rest are in hiding and preparing theire 'I did not vote to bring May down, wink wink, but with her gone I now put myself forward as leader' speeches.
So I don't think it is about restoring May's authority at all, or even necessarily, for the ERG, winning the vote. It's about showing the strengths of the various factions. Those voting against May will include more than just the ERG, so will reveal the number against the deal probably and possibly a few more. Since we already know that will be enough to vote down the deal I don't see why that means it won't go before parliament, so I think it is setting out those numbers so that once her deal is voted down, and she then resigns as I expect, all in the parliamentary party have an idea how many core loyalists there are, how many no dealers and new dealers combined, etc.
Then again, perhaps it's just a response to Baker claiming he has 48 letters already, and the increasingly irritable whispers from the loons about why no VonC has been announced.
OK, so this is Nadine Dorries, but we all knew that...
Mr. kle4, impotence is unfortunate, but waving it around for everyone to see is just foolish.
In unrelated news, I've just begun the Epic of Gilgamesh.
Would have been a surprise for her to have said anything else. She hasn’t got her surrender document on Brexit through Parliament, she has her own MPs in outright rebellion and she is totally inept at campaigning as we saw in the last election.
The EU have made it clear the WA is their "offer" and there's no appetite for a fundamental re-negotiation. I found the WA a tough read but clearly others have found some significant problems with it and it is much nearer BINO than some who wanted us to leave expected or wanted.
So there's the negotiation of now to get the WA in place to prevent us crashing out on 29/3/19 and the negotiation to come which ensures everything is in place so Transition ends on 31/12/20 and we fully exit the EU with no residual obligations or responsibilities.
Gary Streeter's idea (last thread) of a referendum between May's deal and Remain deserves attention - I can see it getting a majority in the Commons, as it brings together all the Remainers plus all the May loyalists. It would infuriate the ERG, but everything infuriates them, so no loss. It would be an interesting test of the theory that Corbyn is a secret Brexiter, since he and everyone else would need to choose between Remain and Just Outside. It would recognise the reality that full-on Brexit just isn't possible unless we accept massive disruption and/or a hard Irish border. But more to the point, it could actually resolve the issue.
I fail to see how going back to the unsatisfactory position that caused the referendum will suddenly make everyone satisfied.
As I've said before, starting from here all options are impossible. It's just a question of finding the least impossible. (FWIW I think that might still be the deal that is on the table, together with a stronger declaration on the final relationship).
Ffs is took a few hours to read on the night it was published. I’m disappointed that more pols haven’t read it.
I assume, anyway...
Still, it was about four millennia back, so the chances are you might get away with it...
The Labour leadership has spent many months skilfully, if cynically, ... pretending that it could negotiate all the benefits of membership of the EU while still leaving. We all know this is tripe. For the moment, Labour is just about hanging together around rejection of Mrs May’s deal. This is the common point that can still unite Mr Corbyn, his Remainer MPs and Labour members. The leadership will vote against the deal because it is a “Tory Brexit” and they think that combining with the Moggites in the division lobbies to defeat the government will somehow precipitate an early general election. Remainer Labour MPs will vote against the deal in the hope that doing so will pave the way to a further referendum. But if Mrs May’s deal goes down and there isn’t a general election, then what? There will be no hiding places left for the Labour leadership. Mr Corbyn will be confronted with the choice that he has been desperate to avoid.
Theresa May has made her choices. For others, the agonising has only just begun. It will soon be time for everyone else to take responsibility for fateful decisions of their own.
I've just finished the first tablet. The moral of which seems to be that men can be tamed by naked women, and a man without a friend is a bit of a git.
VM for you.