Actually the Brexiteers should be pretty pleased with the direction set out in today's document, as it is a little closer to their preferred 'Canada Plus' end-point than Chequers would have been.
'Should' and 'will' are not the same thing, of course. They seem to have got themselves into a mindset of trashing everything even if it's exactly what they've been asking for. More fool them - if they are successful in their trashing, there are only two possible outcomes; either Brexit doesn't happen, or it happens in disaster, in both cases with the added danger of Corbyn.
From the other side of the referendum fence I agree with you entirely.
The UK fleet also catches/traps a shit-load of crab, lobster and shellfish (such as cockles and whelks) that have no market in the UK - despite us being an 'island nation' - and which get sent to markets in Europe.
We don't eat fish or shellfish (well apart from boneless whitefish which doesn't look like fish) and rarely have done. We're not prepared to pay the cost and we don't know how to cook.
I hadn't realised that I'm the exception that proves the rule, about eating anyway.
Another thicko who thinks the 'Future Relationship' can be agreed let alone negotiated before we've left.....
To be fair she has a point, but I'm not sure what choice the government had, faced with the EU's point-blank refusal to negotiate other than that way round.
The Spice Girls were the Nostradamus of Brexit. Here they are cryptically describing the ERG position:
You want my future Forget my past If you wanna get with me Better make it fast Now don't go wasting My precious time Get your act together we could be just fine
They British people do indeed want this to be settled. By cancelling Brexit.
Hold on, you voted to leave didn't you ?
Yes.
But the polling is pretty clear. People do want Brexit settled, and what they want is, in order of popularity:
Remain People's Vote Labour BRINO/Norway4Now No Deal Some other completely insane random made-up nonsense And then right down at the bottom, May's aborted fetus brexit.
May's talent for being no things to no people, has led to her producing a deal that is the least favoured choice of everyone. Remainers, Leavers, Tories, Labour, Nationalists, Unionists.
She's a great unifier.
May's deal is the last Christmas tree. Mis-shapen, stunted, shedding its needles. As far from the promise of festive fun as it is possible to get.
The only person who could ever buy it is someone who has refused to buy one earlier. Who has driven past hundreds. Failed to plan for it. And now, nearly home, dark, on Christmas Eve, has run out of options.
That tree is going to look lovely in the hall of Downing Street. Four tawdry baubles. A string of thread-bare tinsel. A set of lights - that don't work, as she can't find where the fault is.
Can anyone please explain to me why access to waters and access to markets need be linked?
We can both export and import goods without requiring or being able to get the other nations natural resources. If we want to import or export oil we so do,.we don't demand or grant free access to oilfields.
Why would we need to grant access to our waters or demand access to others waters rather than simply trading the haddock, herring etc caught?
Perhaps because there is no point catching fish if you can't actually sell them. Just a thought.
Yes but you can sell your resources without giving away access to your natural resources. It's how it works in almost every other industry.
Actually the Brexiteers should be pretty pleased with the direction set out in today's document, as it is a little closer to their preferred 'Canada Plus' end-point than Chequers would have been.
'Should' and 'will' are not the same thing, of course. They seem to have got themselves into a mindset of trashing everything even if it's exactly what they've been asking for. More fool them - if they are successful in their trashing, there are only two possible outcomes; either Brexit doesn't happen, or it happens in disaster, in both cases with the added danger of Corbyn.
Although obviously not as strong as the WA, might the wish list be at least some leverage vis-a-vis the BA overstaying its welcome?
Another thicko who thinks the 'Future Relationship' can be agreed let alone negotiated before we've left.....
To be fair she has a point, but I'm not sure what choice the government had, faced with the EU's point-blank refusal to negotiate other than that way round.
She conceded that point WAY. TOO. EARLY. It set the tone.
Actually the Brexiteers should be pretty pleased with the direction set out in today's document, as it is a little closer to their preferred 'Canada Plus' end-point than Chequers would have been.
'Should' and 'will' are not the same thing, of course. They seem to have got themselves into a mindset of trashing everything even if it's exactly what they've been asking for. More fool them - if they are successful in their trashing, there are only two possible outcomes; either Brexit doesn't happen, or it happens in disaster, in both cases with the added danger of Corbyn.
Agreed from what I've read so far this seems reasonable. How it goes from vague and positive waffle and into an enforced legal agreement will be the true test.
Can anyone please explain to me why access to waters and access to markets need be linked?
We can both export and import goods without requiring or being able to get the other nations natural resources. If we want to import or export oil we so do,.we don't demand or grant free access to oilfields.
Why would we need to grant access to our waters or demand access to others waters rather than simply trading the haddock, herring etc caught?
Perhaps because there is no point catching fish if you can't actually sell them. Just a thought.
What May has done, regardless of whether her dodgy deal, via a mixture of threats, weaponised pity and blind luck, gets through Parliament, is ensuring that the watchword of her party activists, backbenchers and leave voters is going to be _betrayal_.
That's what May will be remembered for. Fostering a betrayal narrative that will drive the next political cycle in the UK.
The Spice Girls were the Nostradamus of Brexit. Here they are cryptically describing the ERG position:
You want my future Forget my past If you wanna get with me Better make it fast Now don't go wasting My precious time Get your act together we could be just fine
Spooky.
Did they write the lyrics - not sure just singing them counts
Another thicko who thinks the 'Future Relationship' can be agreed let alone negotiated before we've left.....
To be fair she has a point, but I'm not sure what choice the government had, faced with the EU's point-blank refusal to negotiate other than that way round.
Article 50 sets out that the withdrawal agreement should : tak[e into] account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union
And given the Article 50 24 month timeline the chances of negotiating that future relationship would be slim to say the least.
Another thicko who thinks the 'Future Relationship' can be agreed let alone negotiated before we've left.....
To be fair she has a point, but I'm not sure what choice the government had, faced with the EU's point-blank refusal to negotiate other than that way round.
Actually the Brexiteers should be pretty pleased with the direction set out in today's document, as it is a little closer to their preferred 'Canada Plus' end-point than Chequers would have been.
'Should' and 'will' are not the same thing, of course. They seem to have got themselves into a mindset of trashing everything even if it's exactly what they've been asking for. More fool them - if they are successful in their trashing, there are only two possible outcomes; either Brexit doesn't happen, or it happens in disaster, in both cases with the added danger of Corbyn.
Agreed from what I've read so far this seems reasonable. How it goes from vague and positive waffle and into an enforced legal agreement will be the true test.
The only way it can ever work well is for the negotiations to be carried out in smoke-free rooms by faceless bureaucrats, out of the limelight and away from shrieks of 'Betrayal!' every time some half-truth is printed by journalists trying to big-up stories.
The Spice Girls were the Nostradamus of Brexit. Here they are cryptically describing the ERG position:
You want my future Forget my past If you wanna get with me Better make it fast Now don't go wasting My precious time Get your act together we could be just fine
Spooky.
Did they write the lyrics - not sure just singing them counts
Think of it like a medium channeling the dead. They're not saying their own words, but they are still the vessel for that communication.
Brexit in a coma, I know I know, it's serious My, my, my, my, my, my baby, goodbye There were times when I could Have strangled it But you know, I would hate Anything to happen to it Would you please Let me see it Do you really think It'll pull through Do you really think It'll pull through Do Let me whisper my last goodbyes
Another thicko who thinks the 'Future Relationship' can be agreed let alone negotiated before we've left.....
To be fair she has a point, but I'm not sure what choice the government had, faced with the EU's point-blank refusal to negotiate other than that way round.
She conceded that point WAY. TOO. EARLY.
It was in Article 50. Agreed on Brown's watch.
Ah, Gordon Brown. Just when you thought he'd finished fucking over the UK....
The Spice Girls were the Nostradamus of Brexit. Here they are cryptically describing the ERG position:
You want my future Forget my past If you wanna get with me Better make it fast Now don't go wasting My precious time Get your act together we could be just fine
Spooky.
Did they write the lyrics - not sure just singing them counts
Think of it like a medium channeling the dead. They're not saying their own words, but they are still the vessel for that communication.
The UK fleet also catches/traps a shit-load of crab, lobster and shellfish (such as cockles and whelks) that have no market in the UK - despite us being an 'island nation' - and which get sent to markets in Europe.
Another thicko who thinks the 'Future Relationship' can be agreed let alone negotiated before we've left.....
To be fair she has a point, but I'm not sure what choice the government had, faced with the EU's point-blank refusal to negotiate other than that way round.
She conceded that point WAY. TOO. EARLY.
It was in Article 50. Agreed on Brown's watch.
Ah, Gordon Brown. Just when you thought he'd finished fucking over the UK....
The thought of G. Brown fucking anything has put me right off my pie and mash.
May lied to your face, betrayed your constituents and now you're expected to go on TV, support the deeply problematic wording of the PD, and say "thank you Theresa please may I have another".
Imagine how little dignity and self-respect you'd have to have to be a Scots Tory giving May a pass over this.
Aside from Ross and David who've come out diametrically opposed, I think they're all awaiting orders from Ruthie.
Who will fall in line.
I think Ruth backs this, but lets see.
It is hard to see how Nicola objects as it is as good as her Norway choice
Another thicko who thinks the 'Future Relationship' can be agreed let alone negotiated before we've left.....
To be fair she has a point, but I'm not sure what choice the government had, faced with the EU's point-blank refusal to negotiate other than that way round.
She conceded that point WAY. TOO. EARLY.
It was in Article 50. Agreed on Brown's watch.
Ah, Gordon Brown. Just when you thought he'd finished fucking over the UK....
In fairness I don't think anyone at the time was giving serious consideration to a big country leaving - Article 50 was designed for a small recent joiner like Croatia or Slovenia opting out (0.3% EU GDP), not the EU's second biggest economy and 15% of its GDP.....
The only way it can ever work well is for the negotiations to be carried out in smoke-free rooms by faceless bureaucrats, out of the limelight and away from shrieks of 'Betrayal!' every time some half-truth is printed by journalists trying to big-up stories.
I don't hold out great hope.
David Allen Green's point is a GREAT one, the most ardent previous supporters of Brexit seem to be those that are screaming the loudest about the realities of trade deals. Today has been another enlightening day into the mindset of the Brexiteer ultras.
Another thicko who thinks the 'Future Relationship' can be agreed let alone negotiated before we've left.....
To be fair she has a point, but I'm not sure what choice the government had, faced with the EU's point-blank refusal to negotiate other than that way round.
She conceded that point WAY. TOO. EARLY.
It was in Article 50. Agreed on Brown's watch.
Ah, Gordon Brown. Just when you thought he'd finished fucking over the UK....
The thought of G. Brown fucking anything has put me right off my pie and mash.
Another thicko who thinks the 'Future Relationship' can be agreed let alone negotiated before we've left.....
To be fair she has a point, but I'm not sure what choice the government had, faced with the EU's point-blank refusal to negotiate other than that way round.
She conceded that point WAY. TOO. EARLY.
It was in Article 50. Agreed on Brown's watch.
Ah, Gordon Brown. Just when you thought he'd finished fucking over the UK....
In fairness I don't think anyone at the time was giving serious consideration to a big country leaving - Article 50 was designed for a small recent joiner like Croatia or Slovenia opting out (0.3% EU GDP), not the EU's second biggest economy and 15% of its GDP.....
When drafting, you ALWAYS draft for "the scenario that won't happen". Because it's always the one that does, and is always the one that bites you in the arse.
When drafting that clause, there should have only ever been one thought in Brown's head: "What if it is the UK that is leaving? How fucked would we be then?"
The only way it can ever work well is for the negotiations to be carried out in smoke-free rooms by faceless bureaucrats, out of the limelight and away from shrieks of 'Betrayal!' every time some half-truth is printed by journalists trying to big-up stories.
I don't hold out great hope.
David Allen Green's point is a GREAT one, the most ardent previous supporters of Brexit seem to be those that are screaming the loudest about the realities of trade deals. Today has been another enlightening day into the mindset of the Brexiteer ultras.
I thought Rafael Behr's observation yesterday perfect:
Theresa May is back in Brussels today, meeting Jean-Claude Juncker to hammer out details of the political declaration that will describe the longer-term relationship between Britain and the EU. It is a tricky, technical business that requires accommodating the interests of 28 countries. That affords May little room for manoeuvre. Inevitably, a section of the Tory party will hate the document. They hate it already, without having read it. And May cannot placate them because she is in the wrong place, very literally. The prime minister is trying to negotiate Britain’s exit from the EU in a real city on a real continent. She can’t do anything for MPs who want to escape the European demons inside their heads.
Another thicko who thinks the 'Future Relationship' can be agreed let alone negotiated before we've left.....
To be fair she has a point, but I'm not sure what choice the government had, faced with the EU's point-blank refusal to negotiate other than that way round.
She conceded that point WAY. TOO. EARLY.
It was in Article 50. Agreed on Brown's watch.
Ah, Gordon Brown. Just when you thought he'd finished fucking over the UK....
In fairness I don't think anyone at the time was giving serious consideration to a big country leaving - Article 50 was designed for a small recent joiner like Croatia or Slovenia opting out (0.3% EU GDP), not the EU's second biggest economy and 15% of its GDP.....
When drafting, you ALWAYS draft for "the scenario that won't happen". Because it's always the one that does, and is always the one that bites you in the arse.
When drafting that clause, there should have only ever been one thought in Brown's head: "What if it is the UK that is leaving? How fucked would we be then?"
Perhaps he did. 'Ha! If the evil Tories ever take us out of the EU, that will really stuff them at the next election!'
The only way it can ever work well is for the negotiations to be carried out in smoke-free rooms by faceless bureaucrats, out of the limelight and away from shrieks of 'Betrayal!' every time some half-truth is printed by journalists trying to big-up stories.
I don't hold out great hope.
David Allen Green's point is a GREAT one, the most ardent previous supporters of Brexit seem to be those that are screaming the loudest about the realities of trade deals. Today has been another enlightening day into the mindset of the Brexiteer ultras.
I thought Rafael Behr's observation yesterday perfect:
Theresa May is back in Brussels today, meeting Jean-Claude Juncker to hammer out details of the political declaration that will describe the longer-term relationship between Britain and the EU. It is a tricky, technical business that requires accommodating the interests of 28 countries. That affords May little room for manoeuvre. Inevitably, a section of the Tory party will hate the document. They hate it already, without having read it. And May cannot placate them because she is in the wrong place, very literally. The prime minister is trying to negotiate Britain’s exit from the EU in a real city on a real continent. She can’t do anything for MPs who want to escape the European demons inside their heads.
If the ERG rebel in the way they seem intent on doing so on the meaningful vote then I'm going to have to vote remain again in any potential second ref.
Another thicko who thinks the 'Future Relationship' can be agreed let alone negotiated before we've left.....
To be fair she has a point, but I'm not sure what choice the government had, faced with the EU's point-blank refusal to negotiate other than that way round.
She conceded that point WAY. TOO. EARLY.
It was in Article 50. Agreed on Brown's watch.
Ah, Gordon Brown. Just when you thought he'd finished fucking over the UK....
In fairness I don't think anyone at the time was giving serious consideration to a big country leaving - Article 50 was designed for a small recent joiner like Croatia or Slovenia opting out (0.3% EU GDP), not the EU's second biggest economy and 15% of its GDP.....
When drafting, you ALWAYS draft for "the scenario that won't happen". Because it's always the one that does, and is always the one that bites you in the arse.
When drafting that clause, there should have only ever been one thought in Brown's head: "What if it is the UK that is leaving? How fucked would we be then?"
Perhaps he did. 'Ha! If the evil Tories ever take us out of the EU, that will really stuff them at the next election!'
That would mean that Brown was as clever as he thought he was, though.
The only way it can ever work well is for the negotiations to be carried out in smoke-free rooms by faceless bureaucrats, out of the limelight and away from shrieks of 'Betrayal!' every time some half-truth is printed by journalists trying to big-up stories.
I don't hold out great hope.
David Allen Green's point is a GREAT one, the most ardent previous supporters of Brexit seem to be those that are screaming the loudest about the realities of trade deals. Today has been another enlightening day into the mindset of the Brexiteer ultras.
I thought Rafael Behr's observation yesterday perfect:
Theresa May is back in Brussels today, meeting Jean-Claude Juncker to hammer out details of the political declaration that will describe the longer-term relationship between Britain and the EU. It is a tricky, technical business that requires accommodating the interests of 28 countries. That affords May little room for manoeuvre. Inevitably, a section of the Tory party will hate the document. They hate it already, without having read it. And May cannot placate them because she is in the wrong place, very literally. The prime minister is trying to negotiate Britain’s exit from the EU in a real city on a real continent. She can’t do anything for MPs who want to escape the European demons inside their heads.
What May has done, regardless of whether her dodgy deal, via a mixture of threats, weaponised pity and blind luck, gets through Parliament, is ensuring that the watchword of her party activists, backbenchers and leave voters is going to be _betrayal_.
That's what May will be remembered for. Fostering a betrayal narrative that will drive the next political cycle in the UK.
''Twas always going to be the case. May could not deliver on the Brexiteeer promises because no one could, they were always a fantasy. And it was inevitable that failure to deliver them would lead to the development of a betrayal narrative from those who refuse to acknowledge their responsibility for this monumental clusterf*uck.
The only way it can ever work well is for the negotiations to be carried out in smoke-free rooms by faceless bureaucrats, out of the limelight and away from shrieks of 'Betrayal!' every time some half-truth is printed by journalists trying to big-up stories.
I don't hold out great hope.
David Allen Green's point is a GREAT one, the most ardent previous supporters of Brexit seem to be those that are screaming the loudest about the realities of trade deals. Today has been another enlightening day into the mindset of the Brexiteer ultras.
I thought Rafael Behr's observation yesterday perfect:
Theresa May is back in Brussels today, meeting Jean-Claude Juncker to hammer out details of the political declaration that will describe the longer-term relationship between Britain and the EU. It is a tricky, technical business that requires accommodating the interests of 28 countries. That affords May little room for manoeuvre. Inevitably, a section of the Tory party will hate the document. They hate it already, without having read it. And May cannot placate them because she is in the wrong place, very literally. The prime minister is trying to negotiate Britain’s exit from the EU in a real city on a real continent. She can’t do anything for MPs who want to escape the European demons inside their heads.
If the ERG rebel in the way they seem intent on doing so on the meaningful vote then I'm going to have to vote remain again in any potential second ref.
Yep, definitely. Conversely, if the choice were to reapply to Remain vs Leave with The Deal, I'd probably vote Leave, given that I don't think we can realistically go back to the status quo ante but post renegotiation.
Can anyone please explain to me why access to waters and access to markets need be linked?
We can both export and import goods without requiring or being able to get the other nations natural resources. If we want to import or export oil we so do,.we don't demand or grant free access to oilfields.
Why would we need to grant access to our waters or demand access to others waters rather than simply trading the haddock, herring etc caught?
Perhaps because there is no point catching fish if you can't actually sell them. Just a thought.
Yes but you can sell your resources without giving away access to your natural resources. It's how it works in almost every other industry.
The only way it can ever work well is for the negotiations to be carried out in smoke-free rooms by faceless bureaucrats, out of the limelight and away from shrieks of 'Betrayal!' every time some half-truth is printed by journalists trying to big-up stories.
I don't hold out great hope.
David Allen Green's point is a GREAT one, the most ardent previous supporters of Brexit seem to be those that are screaming the loudest about the realities of trade deals. Today has been another enlightening day into the mindset of the Brexiteer ultras.
I thought Rafael Behr's observation yesterday perfect:
Theresa May is back in Brussels today, meeting Jean-Claude Juncker to hammer out details of the political declaration that will describe the longer-term relationship between Britain and the EU. It is a tricky, technical business that requires accommodating the interests of 28 countries. That affords May little room for manoeuvre. Inevitably, a section of the Tory party will hate the document. They hate it already, without having read it. And May cannot placate them because she is in the wrong place, very literally. The prime minister is trying to negotiate Britain’s exit from the EU in a real city on a real continent. She can’t do anything for MPs who want to escape the European demons inside their heads.
If the ERG rebel in the way they seem intent on doing so on the meaningful vote then I'm going to have to vote remain again in any potential second ref.
BoJo has no chance of becoming Tory Party leader because he has no leadership skills and is too divisive a character. JRM’s support is going to be irrelevant because the two have similar backgrounds. If the Tories ever decide that electoral suicide is not for them and finally get rid of May, her successor will need broad support and relevant policies on issues other than Brexit.
Yep, definitely. Conversely, if the choice were to reapply to Remain vs Leave with The Deal, I'd probably vote Leave, given that I don't think we can realistically go back to the status quo ante but post renegotiation.
No idea how I'd vote. Probably no deal, since as you say, the status quo is unrealistic, and May's deal is an unholy abomination from beyond the seven hells that will simply prolong the current civil war and betrayal narrative without end.
Only the cold, hard misery, suffering and chaos of giving the people exactly what they wanted is going to cut it.
Another thicko who thinks the 'Future Relationship' can be agreed let alone negotiated before we've left.....
To be fair she has a point, but I'm not sure what choice the government had, faced with the EU's point-blank refusal to negotiate other than that way round.
She conceded that point WAY. TOO. EARLY.
It was in Article 50. Agreed on Brown's watch.
Ah, Gordon Brown. Just when you thought he'd finished fucking over the UK....
In fairness I don't think anyone at the time was giving serious consideration to a big country leaving - Article 50 was designed for a small recent joiner like Croatia or Slovenia opting out (0.3% EU GDP), not the EU's second biggest economy and 15% of its GDP.....
When drafting, you ALWAYS draft for "the scenario that won't happen". Because it's always the one that does, and is always the one that bites you in the arse.
When drafting that clause, there should have only ever been one thought in Brown's head: "What if it is the UK that is leaving? How fucked would we be then?"
Perhaps he did. 'Ha! If the evil Tories ever take us out of the EU, that will really stuff them at the next election!'
They certainly have no chance of being elected if they abandon Brexit or go ahead with May’s BRINO
Another thicko who thinks the 'Future Relationship' can be agreed let alone negotiated before we've left.....
To be fair she has a point, but I'm not sure what choice the government had, faced with the EU's point-blank refusal to negotiate other than that way round.
She conceded that point WAY. TOO. EARLY.
It was in Article 50. Agreed on Brown's watch.
Ah, Gordon Brown. Just when you thought he'd finished fucking over the UK....
In fairness I don't think anyone at the time was giving serious consideration to a big country leaving - Article 50 was designed for a small recent joiner like Croatia or Slovenia opting out (0.3% EU GDP), not the EU's second biggest economy and 15% of its GDP.....
When drafting, you ALWAYS draft for "the scenario that won't happen". Because it's always the one that does, and is always the one that bites you in the arse.
When drafting that clause, there should have only ever been one thought in Brown's head: "What if it is the UK that is leaving? How fucked would we be then?"
Perhaps he did. 'Ha! If the evil Tories ever take us out of the EU, that will really stuff them at the next election!'
They certainly have no chance of being elected if they abandon Brexit or go ahead with May’s BRINO
On both these scenarios it will be a majority of mps across the house which will make it happen
They certainly have no chance of being elected if they abandon Brexit or go ahead with May’s BRINO
Monday morning, Boris and JRM call a press conference to announce they're the new face of continuity remainerism and launch their campaign for the UK to join the Euro, Schengen area and pan-EU army.
The only way it can ever work well is for the negotiations to be carried out in smoke-free rooms by faceless bureaucrats, out of the limelight and away from shrieks of 'Betrayal!' every time some half-truth is printed by journalists trying to big-up stories.
I don't hold out great hope.
David Allen Green's point is a GREAT one, the most ardent previous supporters of Brexit seem to be those that are screaming the loudest about the realities of trade deals. Today has been another enlightening day into the mindset of the Brexiteer ultras.
I thought Rafael Behr's observation yesterday perfect:
Theresa May is back in Brussels today, meeting Jean-Claude Juncker to hammer out details of the political declaration that will describe the longer-term relationship between Britain and the EU. It is a tricky, technical business that requires accommodating the interests of 28 countries. That affords May little room for manoeuvre. Inevitably, a section of the Tory party will hate the document. They hate it already, without having read it. And May cannot placate them because she is in the wrong place, very literally. The prime minister is trying to negotiate Britain’s exit from the EU in a real city on a real continent. She can’t do anything for MPs who want to escape the European demons inside their heads.
If the ERG rebel in the way they seem intent on doing so on the meaningful vote then I'm going to have to vote remain again in any potential second ref.
May just agreed to allow the EU to hold the UK fishing industry as hostage during trade negotiations. May crossed a red line she promised not to last week. Did the very thing she promised to the cabinet's face not to do.
And best of all, she got NOTHING in return.
Good old May. At least she's consistent.
I did not expect to say this but have you read that the Scottish Fishermans Federation backs it
I would suggest they know a lot mofe about it than your constant anti TM mutterings
Once again, Big G, I'd invited you to remove your gums from around whatever part of Theresa May they're currently clamped to, read the words of the PD with thine own eyes, engage your brain, and try to form your own opinion about why they seem to be diametrically opposed to what May was lying to us about last week, and seem suspiciously like exactly what Macron wanted.
Do you think we'll get to 90 Tories declared against the deal today?
May lying to her party about not linking trading and fishing gotta be worth a few more red votes against May?
Ignoring my comment on my scots fishing connections then.
Bet you were surprised when you read that I have a family connection going back generations to the Stotfield Fishing disaster on the 25th December 1806. You should look it up in Wiki, not as a political point scoring, but the effect it had on my wife's forebears
We're currently at 84 Tories declared against.
How many do you think we'll be at by bedtime?
Have you looked up the Stotfield disaster
As for numbers it is only the numbers on the day of the vote that count
Yes, it is. So humour me, how many Tories do you think May's fishing theatrics today is going to add to the No column?
Might be zero. What do you reckon?
On the day I expect them to vote for the deal rather than risk the possibility of no change
They certainly have no chance of being elected if they abandon Brexit or go ahead with May’s BRINO
If Theresa May manages to get this through the party should be in an excellent position. She'll have delivered Brexit, which even sensible Remainers acknowledge is desirable given the referendum result. She'll have got an end to automatic freedom of movement, which was the principal motivation of Leave voters and a major concern for many Remain voters. We'll be out of the CAP and CFP. She'll have ended direct jurisdiction of the ECJ in UK domestic law, killed off 'ever closer union', and removed the impact of EU law on a range of domestic topics. At the same time she'll have avoided economic catastrophe and the disruption of a no-deal crash out.
Of course, if the noisome ultras keep the party split and howl that all this progress - which is exactly what they campaigned for, almost word-for-word - as 'betrayal', then, yes, the party will be very severely damaged.
I'm not optimistic. They seem to have gone raving mad in a destructive frenzy, trashing their success, after succeeding against the odds. A funny old world, indeed,
Another thicko who thinks the 'Future Relationship' can be agreed let alone negotiated before we've left.....
To be fair she has a point, but I'm not sure what choice the government had, faced with the EU's point-blank refusal to negotiate other than that way round.
May just agreed to allow the EU to hold the UK fishing industry as hostage during trade negotiations. May crossed a red line she promised not to last week. Did the very thing she promised to the cabinet's face not to do.
And best of all, she got NOTHING in return.
Good old May. At least she's consistent.
I did not expect to say this but have you read that the Scottish Fishermans Federation backs it
I would suggest they know a lot mofe about it than your constant anti TM mutterings
Once again, Big G, I'd invited you to remove your gums from around whatever part of Theresa May they're currently clamped to, read the words of the PD with thine own eyes, engage your brain, and try to form your own opinion about why they seem to be diametrically opposed to what May was lying to us about last week, and seem suspiciously like exactly what Macron wanted.
Do you think we'll get to 90 Tories declared against the deal today?
May lying to her party about not linking trading and fishing gotta be worth a few more red votes against May?
Ignoring my comment on my scots fishing connections then.
Bet you were surprised when you read that I have a family connection going back generations to the Stotfield Fishing disaster on the 25th December 1806. You should look it up in Wiki, not as a political point scoring, but the effect it had on my wife's forebears
We're currently at 84 Tories declared against.
How many do you think we'll be at by bedtime?
Have you looked up the Stotfield disaster
As for numbers it is only the numbers on the day of the vote that count
Yes, it is. So humour me, how many Tories do you think May's fishing theatrics today is going to add to the No column?
Might be zero. What do you reckon?
On the day I expect them to vote for the deal rather than risk the possibility of no change
They certainly have no chance of being elected if they abandon Brexit or go ahead with May’s BRINO
If Theresa May manages to get this through the party should be in an excellent position.
She'll have no majority, a party that thinks she's a traitor, a ticking timebomb to defuse, and the blame for every tiniest thing that goes wrong after Brexit day.
Theresa May's name will be political poison to echo through the ages.
They certainly have no chance of being elected if they abandon Brexit or go ahead with May’s BRINO
If Theresa May manages to get this through the party should be in an excellent position. She'll have delivered Brexit, which even sensible Remainers acknowledge is desirable given the referendum result. She'll have got an end to automatic freedom of movement, which was the principal motivation of Leave voters and a major concern for many Remain voters. We'll be out of the CAP and CFP. She'll have ended direct jurisdiction of the ECJ in UK domestic law, killed off 'ever closer union', and removed the impact of EU law on a range of domestic topics. At the same time she'll have avoided economic catastrophe and the disruption of a no-deal crash out.
Of course, if the noisome ultras keep the party split and howl that all this progress - which is exactly what they campaigned for, almost word-for-word - as 'betrayal', then, yes, the party will be very severely damaged.
I'm not optimistic. They seem to have gone raving mad in a destructive frenzy, trashing their success, after succeeding against the odds. A funny old world, indeed,
The only way it can ever work well is for the negotiations to be carried out in smoke-free rooms by faceless bureaucrats, out of the limelight and away from shrieks of 'Betrayal!' every time some half-truth is printed by journalists trying to big-up stories.
I don't hold out great hope.
David Allen Green's point is a GREAT one, the most ardent previous supporters of Brexit seem to be those that are screaming the loudest about the realities of trade deals. Today has been another enlightening day into the mindset of the Brexiteer ultras.
I thought Rafael Behr's observation yesterday perfect:
Theresa May is back in Brussels today, meeting Jean-Claude Juncker to hammer out details of the political declaration that will describe the longer-term relationship between Britain and the EU. It is a tricky, technical business that requires accommodating the interests of 28 countries. That affords May little room for manoeuvre. Inevitably, a section of the Tory party will hate the document. They hate it already, without having read it. And May cannot placate them because she is in the wrong place, very literally. The prime minister is trying to negotiate Britain’s exit from the EU in a real city on a real continent. She can’t do anything for MPs who want to escape the European demons inside their heads.
If the ERG rebel in the way they seem intent on doing so on the meaningful vote then I'm going to have to vote remain again in any potential second ref.
And me and my wife
So as you did in 2016 then....
That is a cheap shot.
I have accepted the vote and backed TM deal all the way. I rejected the ultras the day Boris told Airbus to FO and I will fight ERG no deal all the way
Good for you, Big G. Consistently is overrated, Theresa May's word is law, and we wouldn't want anyone to worry that you'd started to think for yourself, heaven forbid.
The good old "Didn't believe in unicorns hard enough" excuse
The number of dissident Conservative MPs is going up rather than down at present. If the government has a strategy for getting the sheep back in the pen, it needs to start sending the collies out sooner rather than later.
The good old "Didn't believe in unicorns hard enough" excuse
The number of dissident Conservative MPs is going up rather than down at present. If the government has a strategy for getting the sheep back in the pen, it needs to start sending the collies out sooner rather than later.
"The beatings will continue till morale improves" school of Whippery.
The good old "Didn't believe in unicorns hard enough" excuse
The number of dissident Conservative MPs is going up rather than down at present. If the government has a strategy for getting the sheep back in the pen, it needs to start sending the collies out sooner rather than later.
Unfortunately it's more like herding cats than herding sheep.
The good old "Didn't believe in unicorns hard enough" excuse
This belief meme is the most embarrassing thing to me as a tory (albeit Clarke-ite wing)... it's the other lot in Labour who are supposed to have pie-in-the-sky ambitions that don't meet reality and aren't affordable... but EU makes the Brexiteers go cat-nip crazy.
May just agreed to allow the EU to hold the UK fishing industry as hostage during trade negotiations. May crossed a red line she promised not to last week. Did the very thing she promised to the cabinet's face not to do.
And best of all, she got NOTHING in return.
Good old May. At least she's consistent.
I did not expect to say this but have you read that the Scottish Fishermans Federation backs it
I would suggest they know a lot mofe about it than your constant anti TM mutterings
Once again, Big G, I'd invited you to remove your gums from around whatever part of Theresa May they're currently clamped to, read the words of the PD with thine own eyes, engage your brain, and try to form your own opinion about why they seem to be diametrically opposed to what May was lying to us about last week, and seem suspiciously like exactly what Macron wanted.
Do you think we'll get to 90 Tories declared against the deal today?
May lying to her party about not linking trading and fishing gotta be worth a few more red votes against May?
Ignoring my comment on my scots fishing connections then.
Bet you were surprised when you read that I have a family connection going back generations to the Stotfield Fishing disaster on the 25th December 1806. You should look it up in Wiki, not as a political point scoring, but the effect it had on my wife's forebears
We're currently at 84 Tories declared against.
How many do you think we'll be at by bedtime?
Have you looked up the Stotfield disaster
As for numbers it is only the numbers on the day of the vote that count
Yes, it is. So humour me, how many Tories do you think May's fishing theatrics today is going to add to the No column?
Might be zero. What do you reckon?
On the day I expect them to vote for the deal rather than risk the possibility of no change
I thought No deal was better than a bad deal G
Not anymore
G, that is typical Tory for you , they just change their principles if they are struggling, desperate days. Hopefully Scotland will be out of it.
Good for you, Big G. Consistently is overrated, Theresa May's word is law, and we wouldn't want anyone to worry that you'd started to think for yourself, heaven forbid.
The only way it can ever work well is for the negotiations to be carried out in smoke-free rooms by faceless bureaucrats, out of the limelight and away from shrieks of 'Betrayal!' every time some half-truth is printed by journalists trying to big-up stories.
I don't hold out great hope.
David Allen Green's point is a GREAT one, the most ardent previous supporters of Brexit seem to be those that are screaming the loudest about the realities of trade deals. Today has been another enlightening day into the mindset of the Brexiteer ultras.
I thought Rafael Behr's observation yesterday perfect:
Theresa May is back in Brussels today, meeting Jean-Claude Juncker to hammer out details of the political declaration that will describe the longer-term relationship between Britain and the EU. It is a tricky, technical business that requires accommodating the interests of 28 countries. That affords May little room for manoeuvre. Inevitably, a section of the Tory party will hate the document. They hate it already, without having read it. And May cannot placate them because she is in the wrong place, very literally. The prime minister is trying to negotiate Britain’s exit from the EU in a real city on a real continent. She can’t do anything for MPs who want to escape the European demons inside their heads.
If the ERG rebel in the way they seem intent on doing so on the meaningful vote then I'm going to have to vote remain again in any potential second ref.
And me and my wife
So as you did in 2016 then....
That is a cheap shot.
I have accepted the vote and backed TM deal all the way. I rejected the ultras the day Boris told Airbus to FO and I will fight ERG no deal all the way
It's not a cheap shot - just making the point that it changes none of the numbers from 2016.
The only way it can ever work well is for the negotiations to be carried out in smoke-free rooms by faceless bureaucrats, out of the limelight and away from shrieks of 'Betrayal!' every time some half-truth is printed by journalists trying to big-up stories.
I don't hold out great hope.
David Allen Green's point is a GREAT one, the most ardent previous supporters of Brexit seem to be those that are screaming the loudest about the realities of trade deals. Today has been another enlightening day into the mindset of the Brexiteer ultras.
I thought Rafael Behr's observation yesterday perfect:
Theresa May is back in Brussels today, meeting Jean-Claude Juncker to hammer out details of the political declaration that will describe the longer-term relationship between Britain and the EU. It is a tricky, technical business that requires accommodating the interests of 28 countries. That affords May little room for manoeuvre. Inevitably, a section of the Tory party will hate the document. They hate it already, without having read it. And May cannot placate them because she is in the wrong place, very literally. The prime minister is trying to negotiate Britain’s exit from the EU in a real city on a real continent. She can’t do anything for MPs who want to escape the European demons inside their heads.
If the ERG rebel in the way they seem intent on doing so on the meaningful vote then I'm going to have to vote remain again in any potential second ref.
And me and my wife
How I would vote in a second referendum would depend what the question was.
They certainly have no chance of being elected if they abandon Brexit or go ahead with May’s BRINO
If Theresa May manages to get this through the party should be in an excellent position. She'll have delivered Brexit, which even sensible Remainers acknowledge is desirable given the referendum result. She'll have got an end to automatic freedom of movement, which was the principal motivation of Leave voters and a major concern for many Remain voters. We'll be out of the CAP and CFP. She'll have ended direct jurisdiction of the ECJ in UK domestic law, killed off 'ever closer union', and removed the impact of EU law on a range of domestic topics. At the same time she'll have avoided economic catastrophe and the disruption of a no-deal crash out.
Of course, if the noisome ultras keep the party split and howl that all this progress - which is exactly what they campaigned for, almost word-for-word - as 'betrayal', then, yes, the party will be very severely damaged.
I'm not optimistic. They seem to have gone raving mad in a destructive frenzy, trashing their success, after succeeding against the odds. A funny old world, indeed,
I don’t think you can claim any of those for May’s deal. “Ending freedom of movement” is just semantics until we know what happens to immigration and immigration policy post any deal being concluded. We don’t. Similarly, the CFP where fishing rights under the “political statement” have yet to be negotiated. Same with the CAP if we keep EU regs and subsidies to farmers. The extent to which the ECJ will continue to be the final arbiter on U.K. legal cases is also unknown as yet.
May’s agreement seems to give the EU what the want. What it gives Britain is distinctly unclear.
Rabid Tory europhiles like Soubry and Greening are going to be as upset as Brexiteers such as Bone and JRM so the prospects for party unity are pretty non existent.
Good for you, Big G. Consistently is overrated, Theresa May's word is law, and we wouldn't want anyone to worry that you'd started to think for yourself, heaven forbid.
The good old "Didn't believe in unicorns hard enough" excuse
The number of dissident Conservative MPs is going up rather than down at present. If the government has a strategy for getting the sheep back in the pen, it needs to start sending the collies out sooner rather than later.
Unfortunately it's more like herding cats than herding sheep.
I do remember someone once suggesting that meetings of the 1922 Committee were like the bar scene in Star Wars.
The only way it can ever work well is for the negotiations to be carried out in smoke-free rooms by faceless bureaucrats, out of the limelight and away from shrieks of 'Betrayal!' every time some half-truth is printed by journalists trying to big-up stories.
I don't hold out great hope.
David Allen Green's point is a GREAT one, the most ardent previous supporters of Brexit seem to be those that are screaming the loudest about the realities of trade deals. Today has been another enlightening day into the mindset of the Brexiteer ultras.
I thought Rafael Behr's observation yesterday perfect:
Theresa May is back in Brussels today, meeting Jean-Claude Juncker to hammer out details of the political declaration that will describe the longer-term relationship between Britain and the EU. It is a tricky, technical business that requires accommodating the interests of 28 countries. That affords May little room for manoeuvre. Inevitably, a section of the Tory party will hate the document. They hate it already, without having read it. And May cannot placate them because she is in the wrong place, very literally. The prime minister is trying to negotiate Britain’s exit from the EU in a real city on a real continent. She can’t do anything for MPs who want to escape the European demons inside their heads.
If the ERG rebel in the way they seem intent on doing so on the meaningful vote then I'm going to have to vote remain again in any potential second ref.
And me and my wife
So as you did in 2016 then....
That is a cheap shot.
I have accepted the vote and backed TM deal all the way. I rejected the ultras the day Boris told Airbus to FO and I will fight ERG no deal all the way
It's not a cheap shot - just making the point that it changes none of the numbers from 2016.
No - you were inferring I was never pro leave which all my posts have rejecting in supporting TM deal
They certainly have no chance of being elected if they abandon Brexit or go ahead with May’s BRINO
If Theresa May manages to get this through the party should be in an excellent position. She'll have delivered Brexit, which even sensible Remainers acknowledge is desirable given the referendum result. She'll have got an end to automatic freedom of movement, which was the principal motivation of Leave voters and a major concern for many Remain voters. We'll be out of the CAP and CFP. She'll have ended direct jurisdiction of the ECJ in UK domestic law, killed off 'ever closer union', and removed the impact of EU law on a range of domestic topics. At the same time she'll have avoided economic catastrophe and the disruption of a no-deal crash out.
Of course, if the noisome ultras keep the party split and howl that all this progress - which is exactly what they campaigned for, almost word-for-word - as 'betrayal', then, yes, the party will be very severely damaged.
I'm not optimistic. They seem to have gone raving mad in a destructive frenzy, trashing their success, after succeeding against the odds. A funny old world, indeed,
I don’t think you can claim any of those for May’s deal. “Ending freedom of movement” is just semantics until we know what happens to immigration and immigration policy post any deal being concluded. We don’t. Similarly, the CFP where fishing rights under the “political statement” have yet to be negotiated. Same with the CAP if we keep EU regs and subsidies to farmers. The extent to which the ECJ will continue to be the final arbiter on U.K. legal cases is also unknown as yet.
May’s agreement seems to give the EU what the want. What it gives Britain is distinctly unclear.
Rabid Tory europhiles like Soubry and Greening are going to be as upset as Brexiteers such as Bone and JRM so the prospects for party unity are pretty non existent.
But that was always going to be the case. The EU was never going to set up a fully functioning free-trade agreement until the Withdrawal Argeement was done and in place.
Comments
Zigga zig noes to the left 288
I declare this motion really, really wanted.
You want my future
Forget my past
If you wanna get with me
Better make it fast
Now don't go wasting
My precious time
Get your act together we could be just fine
Spooky.
The only person who could ever buy it is someone who has refused to buy one earlier. Who has driven past hundreds. Failed to plan for it. And now, nearly home, dark, on Christmas Eve, has run out of options.
That tree is going to look lovely in the hall of Downing Street. Four tawdry baubles. A string of thread-bare tinsel. A set of lights - that don't work, as she can't find where the fault is.
Ho ho ho.
Brexit your life
Every boy and every girl
Brexit your life
People of the world
Brexit your life
Aah
Stare them down. As you plan for No Deal.
Polly Toynbee"
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/nov/22/angry-england-desires-change-inequality-brussels-bet365-denise-coates
Brexit, use it, Brexit, groove it, show me how good you are.
That's what May will be remembered for. Fostering a betrayal narrative that will drive the next political cycle in the UK.
And given the Article 50 24 month timeline the chances of negotiating that future relationship would be slim to say the least.
"Surrender"
https://twitter.com/BBCNormanS/status/1065607801953763328
I don't hold out great hope.
A mistake the ERG made spectacularly earlier this week.
Here are your "lies to take" for the rest of the day, fresh from the Maybunker.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DsnP6QVXgAESIKe.jpg
I know, it's serious
My, my, my, my, my, my baby, goodbye
There were times when I could
Have strangled it
But you know, I would hate
Anything to happen to it
Would you please
Let me see it
Do you really think
It'll pull through
Do you really think
It'll pull through
Do
Let me whisper my last goodbyes
* until @NickPalmer bans it
Like Buzzfeed have actually compiled a list of all Tory MPs who have said in public they will vote against the deal.
And that number is 84
The list is here https://www.buzzfeed.com/alexwickham/here-are-all-the-tory-mps-who-have-indicated-so-far-that
It's 85 now, but I'll guess it'll be higher by bedtime. Anna Soubry (that well known hard Brexiteer) came out against today.
She’ll find a way
Today has been another enlightening day into the mindset of the Brexiteer ultras.
Anyway, will you PLEASE give him his full title,
"Disgraced national security risk and Secretary of State for negotiating non-existent trade deals Liam Fox"
It's only polite.
When drafting that clause, there should have only ever been one thought in Brown's head: "What if it is the UK that is leaving? How fucked would we be then?"
Theresa May is back in Brussels today, meeting Jean-Claude Juncker to hammer out details of the political declaration that will describe the longer-term relationship between Britain and the EU. It is a tricky, technical business that requires accommodating the interests of 28 countries. That affords May little room for manoeuvre. Inevitably, a section of the Tory party will hate the document. They hate it already, without having read it. And May cannot placate them because she is in the wrong place, very literally. The prime minister is trying to negotiate Britain’s exit from the EU in a real city on a real continent. She can’t do anything for MPs who want to escape the European demons inside their heads.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/nov/21/bolshevik-hardline-brexiteers-rees-mogg-brussels-eu
"
NOSurrender!!!"The number of MPs who sound off to a reporter will be substantially greater than the number of MPs who go into the lobby with Jeremy Corbyn et al.
Let's assume that half of them are lying, that means No's majority is only 86 rather than 170.
Sound reasonable?
Then set about dismantling it.
https://twitter.com/pmdfoster/status/1065611643948843009
Mrs May has always been at war with Eurasia.
Only the cold, hard misery, suffering and chaos of giving the people exactly what they wanted is going to cut it.
https://twitter.com/ConorBurnsUK/status/1065608572535545857
Of course, if the noisome ultras keep the party split and howl that all this progress - which is exactly what they campaigned for, almost word-for-word - as 'betrayal', then, yes, the party will be very severely damaged.
I'm not optimistic. They seem to have gone raving mad in a destructive frenzy, trashing their success, after succeeding against the odds. A funny old world, indeed,
Theresa May's name will be political poison to echo through the ages.
I have accepted the vote and backed TM deal all the way. I rejected the ultras the day Boris told Airbus to FO and I will fight ERG no deal all the way
May’s agreement seems to give the EU what the want. What it gives Britain is distinctly unclear.
Rabid Tory europhiles like Soubry and Greening are going to be as upset as Brexiteers such as Bone and JRM so the prospects for party unity are pretty non existent.