This is the best deal possible for UK and the EU and only deal possible
And the HoC for two opposing reasons will not agree the deal as it leaves us worse off than we are now. "Then we'll crash out with no deal" remains the threat. And for that to happen it means that the UK government has to sit there and actively plan to collapse our economy. For our MPs to sit there doing nothing knowing the consequences. For the machinery of government to operate as the German government did at the end of April 1945.
We won't agree the deal. And we won't crash out because the MPs and the Government and the Civil Service aren't batshit crazy.
It doesn't matter any longer what "the people" think because what they voted for has transpired to be an illusion. We aren't going to allow ourselves to be smashed onto the rocks because of "will of the people" - and that will would be brought into focus very quickly if we did and the consequences bring ruin to them.
We aren't leaving on 29th March.
I think you may be right. The big problem is there are very few sensible politicians in the H/C at the moment and there may not be enough to avert the coming shambles. The deal is kinda crap but it is slightly better than most sensible people expected. It also very well reflects the balance of the Referendum vote. The Brextremists on the one hand and JC on the other are clinging to a mythical better alternative. As a result we could well end up staying in the EU and I will certainly shed no tears if that comes to pass.
All I have to say about Brexit today is this. I don't call
Even the Red Bus only had one lie in it. Even Blair's Dodgy Dossier was predicated on the concept of truth which is why he went to the lengths he did to create evidence to prove claims. May's casual assault on the concept of objective truth in that letter is now full Trumpian. The parliamentary system makes her much easier to remove than a US president. Whether it's now the '22 route, cabinet revolt, the House itself or the deep state she needs to go and go immediately. She's clearly crossed an internal psychological barrier and with the power she holds such unhinged people are very dangerous.
Someone somewhere needs to do their duty.
Perhaps you could be good enough to itemise these "lies" so we can all take a view on it.
No reply yet.......how curious.......The Brexiteers and Remoaners are cut from the same cloth - repeat a lie often enough and it will be believed. Take the whole Gibraltar "capitulation":
The capitulation narrative is ridiculous. Sanchez did what he did for domestic, electoral consumption - and he got exactly what he wanted. The significance of the whole thing is that it is a foretaste of what is to come. Now the WA has been signed off and we head to the FTA talks it’s every country for itself. The easy bit has been done!
Ironically Sanchez is being criticised in Spain today for achieving nothing. PSOE will be the largest party in the Andalucian election next month with fewer seats and votes than last time and no overall majority. All very silly.
PSOE is inect he has been attacked by PP and Cs. If PSOE gets over 30% next Sunday it’ll be job done.
PP will be well down but there vote has simply gone to Ciudadanos with PSOE's going to Podemos. Very much a no change election and utterly pointless to bring it forward unless things change dramatically. As it is posturing on Gibraltar is not much of a vote-winner in the Cadiz province itself.
It blunts a PP and Cs attack line. In several polls at the start of November PSOE fell to 30% and even below. The party has never polled less than 30% in an actual Andalusian election. It’s no coincidence the numbers have climbed since Sanchez started talking about Gibraltar.
All I have to say about Brexit today is this. I don't call for prime ministerial resignations lightly but Theresa May needs to resign and resign immediately. Her ' letter to the nation ' is an abomination and several orders of magnitude worse than Blair's Dodgy Dossier. She flings lie after lie after lie about in just two sides of A4. Demonstrable and total lies. Even one from a PM would have been unthinkable even three years ago yet the abandon with she uses them in that letter lays the foundation for a political crisis starting next April far worse than anything we've experienced so far.
Even the Red Bus only had one lie in it. Even Blair's Dodgy Dossier was predicated on the concept of truth which is why he went to the lengths he did to create evidence to prove claims. May's casual assault on the concept of objective truth in that letter is now full Trumpian. The parliamentary system makes her much easier to remove than a US president. Whether it's now the '22 route, cabinet revolt, the House itself or the deep state she needs to go and go immediately. She's clearly crossed an internal psychological barrier and with the power she holds such unhinged people are very dangerous.
Someone somewhere needs to do their duty.
Calling for somebody to be assasinated on PB is really unacceptable. I can only imagine this has not been challenged because the relevant people haven't been online.
If deal does go through - Conservatives only and immediate concern will be staying in power which requires DUP support.
That surely implies May would have to go and that winner of contest will be someone who is DUP friendly - ie Johnson or somebody who says what Johnson said yesterday.
If the Deal goes through Parliament will have voted for it as law so the DUP will support a VONC in the government before they have a chance to elect a new leader, hence a general election is likely if May gets her Deal through. If she does not either No Deal or EUref2 are more likely, though a general election is still possible if May keeps trying for the Deal in which case the DUP will also support a VONC
I can only suspect you have misunderstood YS's reference to '22. He means the 1922 committee, not what you think he means.
No, he refers to the 1922 committee seperately. The deep state reference and it's following passage are what I am referring to.
In that case you really have gone off the deep end.
Thank you for your concern, but no, I haven't. The reference was quite clear, others have noticed, you simply misunderstood.
I am not making 'a fuss', or trying to get anyone banned, I am sure that Yellow submarine is a valued poster and a good person. However, his clear call for an elected politician to be disposed of by any means necessary, including fairly explicitly asking for the intelligence community to do 'their duty' should have no place here.
If deal does go through - Conservatives only and immediate concern will be staying in power which requires DUP support.
That surely implies May would have to go and that winner of contest will be someone who is DUP friendly - ie Johnson or somebody who says what Johnson said yesterday.
If the Deal goes through Parliament will have voted for it as law so the DUP will support a VONC in the government before they have a chance to elect a new leader, hence a general election is likely if May gets her Deal through. If she does not either No Deal or EUref2 are more likely, though a general election is still possible if May keeps trying for the Deal in which case the DUP will also support a VONC
You do post with such certainty but there are several other possibilities
So, taking into account the letter and other information we have seen this morning:
We will have full control over our waters (which we will use to agree reciprocal access, like under the existing arrangements) There will be no hard border in Ireland and we won’t be under any kind of European court jurisdiction (but only once we’ve found a way to not have a hard border without adopting any rules which are interpreted by European courts, which we’ve made no progress on during 2 years)
The apostrophe in “taxpayer’s” is probably the most offensive part though.
Freedom of movement will end. It will be replaced by movement that is free. We are leaving the Common Fisheries Policy - we will become part of a fisheries policy that is common. We are leaving the Common Agricultural Policy - we will become a part of an agricultural policy that is common.
I know you're joking, but the deal does actually mean we're leaving the CAP right?
The deal says nothing about ending the CAP, FoM and CFP. The accompanying declaration says that the UK will end/leave them, but does not say what will they be replaced with. That will depend on the FTA.
Which will have a fisheries policy based on the existing CFP.
If Labour votes against the deal, we will crash out with no deal. Labour thinks the government will take the blame. I doubt that. The government will say it offered a deal and Labour crashed it. Labour will take the blame.
All I have to say about Brexit today is this. I don't call
Someone somewhere needs to do their duty.
Perhaps you could be good enough to itemise these "lies" so we can all take a view on it.
No reply yet.......how curious.......The Brexiteers and Remoaners are cut from the same cloth - repeat a lie often enough and it will be believed. Take the whole Gibraltar "capitulation":
The capitulation narrative is ridiculous. Sanchez did what he did for domestic, electoral consumption - and he got exactly what he wanted. The significance of the whole thing is that it is a foretaste of what is to come. Now the WA has been signed off and we head to the FTA talks it’s every country for itself. The easy bit has been done!
Ironically Sanchez is being criticised in Spain today for achieving nothing. PSOE will be the largest party in the Andalucian election next month with fewer seats and votes than last time and no overall majority. All very silly.
PSOE is inect he has been attacked by PP and Cs. If PSOE gets over 30% next Sunday it’ll be job done.
PP will be well down but there vote has simply gone to Ciudadanos with PSOE's going to Podemos. Very much a no change election and utterly pointless to bring it forward unless things change dramatically. As it is posturing on Gibraltar is not much of a vote-winner in the Cadiz province itself.
It blunts a PP and Cs attack line. In several polls at the start of November PSOE fell to 30% and even below. The party has never polled less than 30% in an actual Andalusian election. It’s no coincidence the numbers have climbed since Sanchez started talking about Gibraltar.
But they haven't - and Sanchez said nothing about Gibraltar until last week. The poll improvement is simply in line with national changes post the deposition of Rajoy - and even that is fizzling out.
This is the best deal possible for UK and the EU and only deal possible
Easy to say when you have won an outright victory, bit harder for May to sell.
The EU are uncompromising this morning. This is the deal
G, madness if anyone in UK accepts this travesty of a deal. The Tories are sunk and will be out of power for a long time come the next election.
On current polling even if Corbyn became PM the Tories could well be largest party still
If a GE is called I plan to stay out of the market for a week or two. It's not at all clear what would be in the Tory manifesto. Anything could happen with UKIP. Pepe would be active. Tommy Robinson could appear on QT. Corbyn could get badly undermined.
I have come to the conclusion that I can see every bloody side of this arguement and at times they each seem reasonable...
We'll end up crashing out - which will be a disaster / won't be so bad. We'll have a 2nd referendum - Deal v No Deal / Deal v Remain / No Deal v Remain / all 3 via AV. May will get her deal through after the EU flex / don't flex. May will resign / be forced out / stay. There will be a GE - won be Labour / the Tories / no one.
Isn't today's referendum in Switzerland on whether their laws take precedence over international law a wee bit more significant than cows' horns? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-46302030
All I have to say about Brexit today is this. I don't call
Someone somewhere needs to do their duty.
Perhaps you could be good enough to itemise these "lies" so we can all take a view on it.
No reply yet.......how curious.......The Brexiteers and Remoaners are cut from the same cloth - repeat a lie often enough and it will be believed. Take the whole Gibraltar "capitulation":
The capitulation narrative is ridiculous. Sanchez did what he did for domestic, electoral consumption - and he got exactly what he wanted. The significance of the whole thing is that it is a foretaste of what is to come. Now the WA has been signed off and we head to the FTA talks it’s every country for itself. The easy bit has been done!
Ironically Sanchez is being criticised in Spain today for achieving nothing. PSOE will be the largest party in the Andalucian election next month with fewer seats and votes than last time and no overall majority. All very silly.
PSOE is inect he has been attacked by PP and Cs. If PSOE gets over 30% next Sunday it’ll be job done.
PP will be well down but there vote has simply gone to Ciudadanos with PSOE's going to Podemos. Very much a no change election and utterly pointless to bring it forward unless things change dramatically. As it is posturing on Gibraltar is not much of a vote-winner in the Cadiz province itself.
It blunts a PP and Cs attack line. In several polls at the start of November PSOE fell to 30% and even below. The party has never polled less than 30% in an actual Andalusian election. It’s no coincidence the numbers have climbed since Sanchez started talking about Gibraltar.
But they haven't - and Sanchez said nothing about Gibraltar until last week. The poll improvement is simply in line with national changes post the deposition of Rajoy - and even that is fizzling out.
If Labour votes against the deal, we will crash out with no deal. Labour thinks the government will take the blame. I doubt that. The government will say it offered a deal and Labour crashed it. Labour will take the blame.
Tories will blame Labour; Lefties will blame the Tories; those in the middle will blame politicians.
If deal does go through - Conservatives only and immediate concern will be staying in power which requires DUP support.
That surely implies May would have to go and that winner of contest will be someone who is DUP friendly - ie Johnson or somebody who says what Johnson said yesterday.
If the Deal goes through Parliament will have voted for it as law so the DUP will support a VONC in the government before they have a chance to elect a new leader, hence a general election is likely if May gets her Deal through. If she does not either No Deal or EUref2 are more likely, though a general election is still possible if May keeps trying for the Deal in which case the DUP will also support a VONC
You do post with such certainty but there are several other possibilities
No there aren't, the EU have made clear they are not going to reopen negotiations so the above are the only alternatives
I have come to the conclusion that I can see every bloody side of this arguement and at times they each seem reasonable...
We'll end up crashing out - which will be a disaster / won't be so bad. We'll have a 2nd referendum - Deal v No Deal / Deal v Remain / No Deal v Remain / all 3 via AV. May will get her deal through after the EU flex / don't flex. May will resign / be forced out / stay. There will be a GE - won be Labour / the Tories / no one.
My head will explode.
(The last one is probably most certain.)
On the same page but hope my head stays intact as does yours
This is a betting site and, while I do not bet, lots money must be won and lost on all this
So, taking into account the letter and other information we have seen this morning:
We will have full control over our waters (which we will use to agree reciprocal access, like under the existing arrangements) There will be no hard border in Ireland and we won’t be under any kind of European court jurisdiction (but only once we’ve found a way to not have a hard border without adopting any rules which are interpreted by European courts, which we’ve made no progress on during 2 years)
The apostrophe in “taxpayer’s” is probably the most offensive part though.
Freedom of movement will end. It will be replaced by movement that is free. We are leaving the Common Fisheries Policy - we will become part of a fisheries policy that is common. We are leaving the Common Agricultural Policy - we will become a part of an agricultural policy that is common.
I know you're joking, but the deal does actually mean we're leaving the CAP right?
The deal says nothing about ending the CAP, FoM and CFP. The accompanying declaration says that the UK will end/leave them, but does not say what will they be replaced with. That will depend on the FTA.
That is just plain wrong. E.g. re FoM, this from the EU Law Analysis site:
"Key question: Does the withdrawal agreement end free movement of people?
Yes, free movement ends at the end of the transition period, unless the UK and EU decide to sign a separate treaty as part of the future relationship extending free movement in the future. Currently the UK government opposes this idea. The ‘backstop’ relating to Northern Ireland, if it ends up applying, does not include free movement of people, but only the continuation of the UK/Ireland common travel area, which is more limited."
Yes, that’s a fair point. If we do not agree an FTA with the EU FoM will just end. My assumption - and this could be wrong - is that we’ll do an FTA which minimises the economic harm caused by leaving the SM and CU.
TBF that's a different issue. By the time we agree an FTA, Jezza or BoJo (or someone else not even on the radar) could be PM.
So, taking into account the letter and other information we have seen this morning:
We will have full control over our waters (which we will use to agree reciprocal access, like under the existing arrangements) There will be no hard border in Ireland and we won’t be under any kind of European court jurisdiction (but only once we’ve found a way to not have a hard border without adopting any rules which are interpreted by European courts, which we’ve made no progress on during 2 years)
The apostrophe in “taxpayer’s” is probably the most offensive part though.
Freedom of movement will end. It will be replaced by movement that is free. We are leaving the Common Fisheries Policy - we will become part of a fisheries policy that is common. We are leaving the Common Agricultural Policy - we will become a part of an agricultural policy that is common.
I know you're joking, but the deal does actually mean we're leaving the CAP right?
The deal says nothing about ending the CAP, FoM and CFP. The accompanying declaration says that the UK will end/leave them, but does not say what will they be replaced with. That will depend on the FTA.
Which will have a fisheries policy based on the existing CFP.
Hence my prediction we’ll leave the CFP, but sign up to a fisheries policy that is common!!
I can only suspect you have misunderstood YS's reference to '22. He means the 1922 committee, not what you think he means.
No, he refers to the 1922 committee seperately. The deep state reference and it's following passage are what I am referring to.
In that case you really have gone off the deep end.
Thank you for your concern, but no, I haven't. The reference was quite clear, others have noticed, you simply misunderstood.
I am not making 'a fuss', or trying to get anyone banned, I am sure that Yellow submarine is a valued poster and a good person. However, his clear call for an elected politician to be disposed of by any means necessary, including fairly explicitly asking for the intelligence community to do 'their duty' should have no place here.
I did not call for Theresa May to be assassinated. Even in the depths of the Coalition I didn't call for Nick Clegg to be assassinated. So I'm not going to start with Theresa May.
I have come to the conclusion that I can see every bloody side of this arguement and at times they each seem reasonable...
We'll end up crashing out - which will be a disaster / won't be so bad. We'll have a 2nd referendum - Deal v No Deal / Deal v Remain / No Deal v Remain / all 3 via AV. May will get her deal through after the EU flex / don't flex. May will resign / be forced out / stay. There will be a GE - won be Labour / the Tories / no one.
My head will explode.
(The last one is probably most certain.)
I would suggest that is to your credit... even if it does result in cranial detonation.
So, taking into account the letter and other information we have seen this morning:
We will have full control over our waters (which we will use to agree reciprocal access, like under the existing arrangements) There will be no hard border in Ireland and we won’t be under any kind of European court jurisdiction (but only once we’ve found a way to not have a hard border without adopting any rules which are interpreted by European courts, which we’ve made no progress on during 2 years)
The apostrophe in “taxpayer’s” is probably the most offensive part though.
Freedom of movement will end. It will be replaced by movement that is free. We are leaving the Common Fisheries Policy - we will become part of a fisheries policy that is common. We are leaving the Common Agricultural Policy - we will become a part of an agricultural policy that is common.
I know you're joking, but the deal does actually mean we're leaving the CAP right?
The deal says nothing about ending the CAP, FoM and CFP. The accompanying declaration says that the UK will end/leave them, but does not say what will they be replaced with. That will depend on the FTA.
Which will have a fisheries policy based on the existing CFP.
Hence my prediction we’ll leave the CFP, but sign up to a fisheries policy that is common!!
That's a choice our elected politicians could make - trading access to fish export markets for access to fishing waters. What is wrong with that as a sovereign decision we can take or not as a country?
If deal does go through - Conservatives only and immediate concern will be staying in power which requires DUP support.
That surely implies May would have to go and that winner of contest will be someone who is DUP friendly - ie Johnson or somebody who says what Johnson said yesterday.
If the Deal goes through Parliament will have voted for it as law so the DUP will support a VONC in the government before they have a chance to elect a new leader, hence a general election is likely if May gets her Deal through. If she does not either No Deal or EUref2 are more likely, though a general election is still possible if May keeps trying for the Deal in which case the DUP will also support a VONC
You do post with such certainty but there are several other possibilities
No there aren't, the EU have made clear they are not going to reopen negotiations so the above are the only alternatives
You do at times lay yourself wide open. You have no idea how the EU will act if this falls.
I see Lisa Nandy has now said it is inconceivable that she'll vote for the deal. That reduces the number of Labour MPs who've suggested that they might to 2 (Flint, Snell), though it's obviously quite likely that others have considered doing so but see no reason to go public.
Hunt's comment on TV today that a Parliamentary vote blocking "no deal" was possible after rejection but it would probably need a change of government deserves more attention than it's had. I'm sure he's seeing this as a warning to fellow-Tory MPs, but it certainly gives everyone else an incentive. That creates a new possible sequence:
1. Parliament votes down the deal by a big majority. 2. The markets go crazy. 3. May appeals for a new vote, and refuses any other alternative, but it becomes clear that it would fail. 4. The markets go crazier. 5. Parliament votes no confidence in May. 6. Corbyn offers a deal: 6 months in government to hold a Remain/Leave 2nd vote, followed by a new election. He guarantees no change in Ireland. 7. The DUP support it.
I have come to the conclusion that I can see every bloody side of this arguement and at times they each seem reasonable...
We'll end up crashing out - which will be a disaster / won't be so bad. We'll have a 2nd referendum - Deal v No Deal / Deal v Remain / No Deal v Remain / all 3 via AV. May will get her deal through after the EU flex / don't flex. May will resign / be forced out / stay. There will be a GE - won be Labour / the Tories / no one.
My head will explode.
(The last one is probably most certain.)
I would suggest that is to your credit... even if it does result in cranial detonation.
If deal does go through - Conservatives only and immediate concern will be staying in power which requires DUP support.
That surely implies May would have to go and that winner of contest will be someone who is DUP friendly - ie Johnson or somebody who says what Johnson said yesterday.
If the Deal goes through Parliament will have voted for it as law so the DUP will support a VONC in the government before they have a chance to elect a new leader, hence a general election is likely if May gets her Deal through. If she does not either No Deal or EUref2 are more likely, though a general election is still possible if May keeps trying for the Deal in which case the DUP will also support a VONC
That's not what Arlene said this morning. Per BBC:
"Mrs Foster has already said if the government's deal gets passed in the Commons, the DUP will have to review the confidence and supply pact.
"We'll review it at that point in time: things are fluid, things change - we'll have to see where we are," she added.
I see Lisa Nandy has now said it is inconceivable that she'll vote for the deal. That reduces the number of Labour MPs who've suggested that they might to 2 (Flint, Snell), though it's obviously quite likely that others have considered doing so but see no reason to go public.
Hunt's comment on TV today that a Parliamentary vote blocking "no deal" was possible after rejection but it would probably need a change of government deserves more attention than it's had. I'm sure he's seeing this as a warning to fellow-Tory MPs, but it certainly gives everyone else an incentive. That creates a new possible sequence:
1. Parliament votes down the deal by a big majority. 2. The markets go crazy. 3. May appeals for a new vote, and refuses any other alternative, but it becomes clear that it would fail. 4. The markets go crazier. 5. Parliament votes no confidence in May. 6. Corbyn offers a deal: 6 months in government to hold a Remain/Leave 2nd vote, followed by a new election. He guarantees no change in Ireland. 7. The DUP support it.
Unlikely? Yes IMO. Inconceivable? No.
The only thing that's inconceivable nowadays, is that anything is inconceivable.
This is the best deal possible for UK and the EU and only deal possible
And the HoC for two opposing reasons will not agree the deal as it leaves us worse off than we are now. "Then we'll crash out with no deal" remains the threat. And for that to happen it means that the UK government has to sit there and actively plan to collapse our economy. For our MPs to sit there doing nothing knowing the consequences. For the machinery of government to operate as the German government did at the end of April 1945.
We won't agree the deal. And we won't crash out because the MPs and the Government and the Civil Service aren't batshit crazy.
It doesn't matter any longer what "the people" think because what they voted for has transpired to be an illusion. We aren't going to allow ourselves to be smashed onto the rocks because of "will of the people" - and that will would be brought into focus very quickly if we did and the consequences bring ruin to them.
We aren't leaving on 29th March.
I think you may be right. The big problem is there are very few sensible politicians in the H/C at the moment and there may not be enough to avert the coming shambles. The deal is kinda crap but it is slightly better than most sensible people expected. It also very well reflects the balance of the Referendum vote. The Brextremists on the one hand and JC on the other are clinging to a mythical better alternative. As a result we could well end up staying in the EU and I will certainly shed no tears if that comes to pass.
Of course you won't be the one having to deal with the consequences of that betrayal.
If deal does go through - Conservatives only and immediate concern will be staying in power which requires DUP support.
That surely implies May would have to go and that winner of contest will be someone who is DUP friendly - ie Johnson or somebody who says what Johnson said yesterday.
If the Deal goes through Parliament will have voted for it as law so the DUP will support a VONC in the government before they have a chance to elect a new leader, hence a general election is likely if May gets her Deal through. If she does not either No Deal or EUref2 are more likely, though a general election is still possible if May keeps trying for the Deal in which case the DUP will also support a VONC
That's not what Arlene said this morning. Per BBC:
"Mrs Foster has already said if the government's deal gets passed in the Commons, the DUP will have to review the confidence and supply pact.
"We'll review it at that point in time: things are fluid, things change - we'll have to see where we are," she added.
All I have to say about Brexit today is this. I don't call
Someone somewhere needs to do their duty.
Perhaps you could be good enough to itemise these "lies" so we can all take a view on it.
No reply yet.......how curious.......The Brexiteers and Remoaners are cut from the same cloth - repeat a lie often enough and it will be believed. Take the whole Gibraltar "capitulation":
The capitulation narrative is ridiculous. Sanchez did what he did for domestic, electoral consumption - and he got exactly what he wanted. The significance of the whole thing is that it is a foretaste of what is to come. Now the WA has been signed off and we head to the FTA talks it’s every country for itself. The easy bit has been done!
Ironically Sanchez is being criticised in Spain today for achieving nothing. PSOE will be the largest party in the Andalucian election next month with fewer seats and votes than last time and no overall majority. All very silly.
PSOE is inect he has been attacked by PP and Cs. If PSOE gets over 30% next Sunday it’ll be job done.
PP will be well down but there vote has simply gone to Ciudadanos with PSOE's going to Podemos. Very much a no change election and utterly pointless to bring it forward unless things change dramatically. As it is posturing on Gibraltar is not much of a vote-winner in the Cadiz province itself.
It blunts a PP and Cs attack line. In several polls at the start of November PSOE fell to 30% and even below. The party has never polled less than 30% in an actual Andalusian election. It’s no coincidence the numbers have climbed since Sanchez started talking about Gibraltar.
But they haven't - and Sanchez said nothing about Gibraltar until last week. The poll improvement is simply in line with national changes post the deposition of Rajoy - and even that is fizzling out.
I wrote a "comment" justifying why I now judge that the UK will not leave the EU on 29/3/19. It was a bit long and is probably better suited as a thread.
I see Lisa Nandy has now said it is inconceivable that she'll vote for the deal. That reduces the number of Labour MPs who've suggested that they might to 2 (Flint, Snell), though it's obviously quite likely that others have considered doing so but see no reason to go public.
Hunt's comment on TV today that a Parliamentary vote blocking "no deal" was possible after rejection but it would probably need a change of government deserves more attention than it's had. I'm sure he's seeing this as a warning to fellow-Tory MPs, but it certainly gives everyone else an incentive. That creates a new possible sequence:
1. Parliament votes down the deal by a big majority. 2. The markets go crazy. 3. May appeals for a new vote, and refuses any other alternative, but it becomes clear that it would fail. 4. The markets go crazier. 5. Parliament votes no confidence in May. 6. Corbyn offers a deal: 6 months in government to hold a Remain/Leave 2nd vote, followed by a new election. He guarantees no change in Ireland. 7. The DUP support it.
Unlikely? Yes IMO. Inconceivable? No.
Surely the markets have already priced in a high chance of the vote failing. Like us they're waiting to see what comes next
So, taking into account the letter and other information we have seen this morning:
We will have full control over our waters (which we will use to agree reciprocal access, like under the existing arrangements) There will be no hard border in Ireland and we won’t be under any kind of European court jurisdiction (but only once we’ve found a way to not have a hard border without adopting any rules which are interpreted by European courts, which we’ve made no progress on during 2 years)
The apostrophe in “taxpayer’s” is probably the most offensive part though.
Freedom of movement will end. It will be replaced by movement that is free. We are leaving the Common Fisheries Policy - we will become part of a fisheries policy that is common. We are leaving the Common Agricultural Policy - we will become a part of an agricultural policy that is common.
I know you're joking, but the deal does actually mean we're leaving the CAP right?
The deal says nothing about ending the CAP, FoM and CFP. The accompanying declaration says that the UK will end/leave them, but does not say what will they be replaced with. That will depend on the FTA.
Which will have a fisheries policy based on the existing CFP.
Hence my prediction we’ll leave the CFP, but sign up to a fisheries policy that is common!!
That's a choice our elected politicians could make - trading access to fish export markets for access to fishing waters. What is wrong with that as a sovereign decision we can take or not as a country?
Tories sell out Scottish fishermen yet again, wonder if any of the 13 MP's will have principles, guaranteed Mundell and Davidson will not.
Question. If asking the people to approve the deal is something that the PM won't countenance, why is she writing begging letters to the people asking them to approve the deal? She is hoping that the opinion of voters will force her MPs to back it. But when asked if voters should be allowed to express their opinion she insists it can't happen...
On a procedural point, if somehow parliament were to vote for the deal in the Meaningful Vote, then Corbyn brought a motion of no confidence that the government lost due to a massive DUP huff, has parliament now done enough to make the deal happen, or is there a load of other stuff it has to do to head off No Deal that it won't be doing for a while because there's no longer a government?
So, taking into account the letter and other information we have seen this morning:
We will have full control over our waters (which we will use to agree reciprocal access, like under the existing arrangements) There will be no hard border in Ireland and we won’t be under any kind of European court jurisdiction (but only once we’ve found a way to not have a hard border without adopting any rules which are interpreted by European courts, which we’ve made no progress on during 2 years)
The apostrophe in “taxpayer’s” is probably the most offensive part though.
Freedom of movement will end. It will be replaced by movement that is free. We are leaving the Common Fisheries Policy - we will become part of a fisheries policy that is common. We are leaving the Common Agricultural Policy - we will become a part of an agricultural policy that is common.
I know you're joking, but the deal does actually mean we're leaving the CAP right?
The deal says nothing about ending the CAP, FoM and CFP. The accompanying declaration says that the UK will end/leave them, but does not say what will they be replaced with. That will depend on the FTA.
Which will have a fisheries policy based on the existing CFP.
Hence my prediction we’ll leave the CFP, but sign up to a fisheries policy that is common!!
That's a choice our elected politicians could make - trading access to fish export markets for access to fishing waters. What is wrong with that as a sovereign decision we can take or not as a country?
Tories sell out Scottish fishermen yet again, wonder if any of the 13 MP's will have principles, guaranteed Mundell and Davidson will not.
I dunno, is it worse to sell their fishing rights or their ability to export fish?
Question. If asking the people to approve the deal is something that the PM won't countenance, why is she writing begging letters to the people asking them to approve the deal? She is hoping that the opinion of voters will force her MPs to back it. But when asked if voters should be allowed to express their opinion she insists it can't happen...
Delays for referendum or GE are not optimal for the country, it would be best of parliament positively decided one way or another. Until it is clear parliament is not going to do that of course she won't countenanced asking the people again. It shouldn't be necessary, our MPs should be able to make the call by this point.
This is the best deal possible for UK and the EU and only deal possible
And the HoC for two opposing reasons will not agree the deal as it leaves us worse off than we are now. "Then we'll crash out with no deal" remains the threat. And for that to happen it means that the UK government has to sit there and actively plan to collapse our economy. For our MPs to sit there doing nothing knowing the consequences. For the machinery of government to operate as the German government did at the end of April 1945.
We won't agree the deal. And we won't crash out because the MPs and the Government and the Civil Service aren't batshit crazy.
It doesn't matter any longer what "the people" think because what they voted for has transpired to be an illusion. We aren't going to allow ourselves to be smashed onto the rocks because of "will of the people" - and that will would be brought into focus very quickly if we did and the consequences bring ruin to them.
We aren't leaving on 29th March.
I think you may be right. The big problem is there are very few sensible politicians in the H/C at the moment and there may not be enough to avert the coming shambles. The deal is kinda crap but it is slightly better than most sensible people expected. It also very well reflects the balance of the Referendum vote. The Brextremists on the one hand and JC on the other are clinging to a mythical better alternative. As a result we could well end up staying in the EU and I will certainly shed no tears if that comes to pass.
Of course you won't be the one having to deal with the consequences of that betrayal.
Nigel Farage's appalling promise of what he will do in the event that Brexit is "not delivered":
Mmmm... I supposed he has to say it - but it's not going to sway many votes, is it?
(PS I still think most likely that a few sections of MPs will fold/abstain and May will somehow get her deal.)
No it won't, people don't like being told such things, whether they are public or MPs. However, it is important for it to be said since if it is true that will become very apparent soon and anyone who dismissed it as untrue will not be able to pretend it was a mere May threat.
These pieces on betrayed Fisherfolk have been common recently but here is today's Observer version. To it's credit it gives extensive space to direct quotes so the interviewees can tell their own stories. Though equally their is a clear " what did they expect ? " editorial stance.
If Labour votes against the deal, we will crash out with no deal. Labour thinks the government will take the blame. I doubt that. The government will say it offered a deal and Labour crashed it. Labour will take the blame.
Hardly. If the government had a united front on this, maybe, but as it is a massive chunk of Tories will be voting against giving cover to anyone else who wants to even if we then crash out. I don't accept the childish reasoning that oppositions are duty bound to oppose, but at the end of the day it is right that the Tories are in power and it's on them to get a deal through, and if they cannot there may be an element of blame for Labour - particularly if they are focusing on getting a GE at the cost of a reasonable deal - but they will never take the most of it.
This is the best deal possible for UK and the EU and only deal possible
And the HoC for two opposing reasons will not agree the deal as it leaves us worse off than we are now. "Then we'll crash out with no deal" remains the threat. And for that to happen it means that the UK government has to sit there and actively plan to collapse our economy. For our MPs to sit there doing nothing knowing the consequences. For the machinery of government to operate as the German government did at the end of April 1945.
We won't agree the deal. And we won't crash out because the MPs and the Government and the Civil Service aren't batshit crazy.
It doesn't matter any longer what "the people" think because what they voted for has transpired to be an illusion. We aren't going to allow ourselves to be smashed onto the rocks because of "will of the people" - and that will would be brought into focus very quickly if we did and the consequences bring ruin to them.
We aren't leaving on 29th March.
I agree. At least, I think there is a very good chance of that. Simple stubbornness and incompetence means no deal also still has a chance, but there's a strong chance Brexit is no longer happening.
If deal does go through - Conservatives only and immediate concern will be staying in power which requires DUP support.
That surely implies May would have to go and that winner of contest will be someone who is DUP friendly - ie Johnson or somebody who says what Johnson said yesterday.
If the Deal goes through Parliament will have voted for it as law so the DUP will support a VONC in the government before they have a chance to elect a new leader, hence a general election is likely if May gets her Deal through. If she does not either No Deal or EUref2 are more likely, though a general election is still possible if May keeps trying for the Deal in which case the DUP will also support a VONC
That's not what Arlene said this morning. Per BBC:
"Mrs Foster has already said if the government's deal gets passed in the Commons, the DUP will have to review the confidence and supply pact.
"We'll review it at that point in time: things are fluid, things change - we'll have to see where we are," she added.
Foster on Marr confirms she will review confidence and supply deal with the Tories if her Deal goes through but she does not think she can get it through.
Does not confirm either she will support May's Tories on confidence and supply even if her Deal is voted down but would have to look at the circumstances. Suggests could be a general election in January if the DUP vote down May's government
For an election to take place on January 31st Parliament will have to be dissolved before the Xmas recess. Is that likely?
This is the best deal possible for UK and the EU and only deal possible
And the HoC for two opposing reasons will not agree the deal as it leaves us worse off than we are now. "Then we'll crash out with no deal" remains the threat. And for that to happen it means that the UK government has to sit there and actively plan to collapse our economy. For our MPs to sit there doing nothing knowing the consequences. For the machinery of government to operate as the German government did at the end of April 1945.
We won't agree the deal. And we won't crash out because the MPs and the Government and the Civil Service aren't batshit crazy.
It doesn't matter any longer what "the people" think because what they voted for has transpired to be an illusion. We aren't going to allow ourselves to be smashed onto the rocks because of "will of the people" - and that will would be brought into focus very quickly if we did and the consequences bring ruin to them.
We aren't leaving on 29th March.
I agree. At least, I think there is a very good chance of that. Simple stubbornness and incompetence means no deal also still has a chance, but there's a strong chance Brexit is no longer happening.
If deal does go through - Conservatives only and immediate concern will be staying in power which requires DUP support.
That surely implies May would have to go and that winner of contest will be someone who is DUP friendly - ie Johnson or somebody who says what Johnson said yesterday.
If the Deal goes through Parliament will have voted for it as law so the DUP will support a VONC in the government before they have a chance to elect a new leader, hence a general election is likely if May gets her Deal through. If she does not either No Deal or EUref2 are more likely, though a general election is still possible if May keeps trying for the Deal in which case the DUP will also support a VONC
That's not what Arlene said this morning. Per BBC:
"Mrs Foster has already said if the government's deal gets passed in the Commons, the DUP will have to review the confidence and supply pact.
"We'll review it at that point in time: things are fluid, things change - we'll have to see where we are," she added.
Seems pretty relevant the point where people can convince themselves they are being betrayed,simply because of a sanguine reaction from the other side.
Is there any possibility at all that one of the EU's conditions for this deal was that we all had to pretend to hate it?
I don't think that needed to be conditioned, since by definition any deal would have been full of concessions (more one side than the other, to be sure) and everyone would legitimately hate it but perhaps still support it.
The problem we have is two fold - it is perceived as too bad for too many to back it, and those who might be willing to consider it as better than no deal see no reason to back it as they see Remain as possible.
Without the latter I think it would fall, but perhaps not by so much that it was inconceivable it might pass on the second attempt. But because of it it will fail by 150 or so, too much to be salvaged.
If deal does go through - Conservatives only and immediate concern will be staying in power which requires DUP support.
That surely implies May would have to go and that winner of contest will be someone who is DUP friendly - ie Johnson or somebody who says what Johnson said yesterday.
If the Deal goes through Parliament will have voted for it as law so the DUP will support a VONC in the government before they have a chance to elect a new leader, hence a general election is likely if May gets her Deal through. If she does not either No Deal or EUref2 are more likely, though a general election is still possible if May keeps trying for the Deal in which case the DUP will also support a VONC
You do post with such certainty but there are several other possibilities
No there aren't, the EU have made clear they are not going to reopen negotiations so the above are the only alternatives
You do at times lay yourself wide open. You have no idea how the EU will act if this falls.
We know exactly as the EU have set the best terms they are willing to offer and as they have made abundantly clear they have their own domestic issues to deal with and are not going to offer any more favourable terms to a country that has voted to leave the EU
Seems pretty relevant the point where people can convince themselves they are being betrayed,simply because of a sanguine reaction from the other side.
Quite bizarre....this sort of language/approach fuels armed conflict.....
Foster on Marr confirms she will review confidence and supply deal with the Tories if her Deal goes through but she does not think she can get it through.
Does not confirm either she will support May's Tories on confidence and supply even if her Deal is voted down but would have to look at the circumstances. Suggests could be a general election in January if the DUP vote down May's government
For an election to take place on January 31st Parliament will have to be dissolved before the Xmas recess. Is that likely?
Quite possibly if the DUP back a VONC in the government before Christmas which they are putting on the table as a possibility
I think perhaps William Glenn and Southam Observer are right about May and I've just been naive and too traumatised by the referendum. Perhaps it should have been obvious how far May would go and much damage she would inflict to secure her place in the bottom quartile of PMs rather than the bottom decile.
And no ! I'm not Nicola Sturgeon.
I had a lot of respect for Theresa May until she went back on her word re-calling an early General Election. Never to be trusted again - 'Once a liar always a liar.'
On a procedural point, if somehow parliament were to vote for the deal in the Meaningful Vote, then Corbyn brought a motion of no confidence that the government lost due to a massive DUP huff, has parliament now done enough to make the deal happen, or is there a load of other stuff it has to do to head off No Deal that it won't be doing for a while because there's no longer a government?
The meaningful vote section of the EU (Withdrawal) Act requires that a motion to take note of the deal be tabled in the Lords. They then have to debate it or, if they prefer, not finish debating it within five sitting days (for example if they haven't started debating it). There has to be an Act providing for its implementation, but the Parliament Act could be invoked. This could all be done before the end of the two weeks specified by the FTPA. You like drama?
Edit: the above may not be correct. The five days specified for the Lords under the EU(W)A are sitting days, whereas the 14 under the FTPA are solar days.
Yes, in the short term. In the medium term possibly, though long term we're now probably going to remain so it'll be very divisive but not economically messed up.
Foster on Marr confirms she will review confidence and supply deal with the Tories if her Deal goes through but she does not think she can get it through.
Does not confirm either she will support May's Tories on confidence and supply even if her Deal is voted down but would have to look at the circumstances. Suggests could be a general election in January if the DUP vote down May's government
For an election to take place on January 31st Parliament will have to be dissolved before the Xmas recess. Is that likely?
Quite possibly if the DUP back a VONC in the government before Christmas
As Arlene has made this statement it is very clear that the DUP expecting a VONC in which they vote no confidence is precisely what she is expecting. All of the assumption is that Corbyn would raise the confidence motion. Be funny if the DUP did it...
If deal does go through - Conservatives only and immediate concern will be staying in power which requires DUP support.
That surely implies May would have to go and that winner of contest will be someone who is DUP friendly - ie Johnson or somebody who says what Johnson said yesterday.
If the Deal goes through Parliament will have voted for it as law so the DUP will support a VONC in the government before they have a chance to elect a new leader, hence a general election is likely if May gets her Deal through. If she does not either No Deal or EUref2 are more likely, though a general election is still possible if May keeps trying for the Deal in which case the DUP will also support a VONC
You do post with such certainty but there are several other possibilities
No there aren't, the EU have made clear they are not going to reopen negotiations so the above are the only alternatives
You do at times lay yourself wide open. You have no idea how the EU will act if this falls.
We know exactly as the EU have set the best terms they are willing to offer and as they have made abundantly clear they have their own domestic issues to deal with and are not going to offer any more favourable terms to a country that has voted to leave the EU
I do not accept that until it is actually challenged post the deal failing
Yes, in the short term. In the medium term possibly, though long term we're now probably going to remain so it'll be very divisive but not economically messed up.
I've given up wondering about anything but the short term. I just want to know there will be food, water and medicines in late March.
This is the best deal possible for UK and the EU and only deal possible
And the HoC for two opposing reasons will not agree the deal as it leaves us worse off than we are now. "Then we'll crash out with no deal" remains the threat. And for that to happen it means that the UK government has to sit there and actively plan to collapse our economy. For our MPs to sit there doing nothing knowing the consequences. For the machinery of government to operate as the German government did at the end of April 1945.
We won't agree the deal. And we won't crash out because the MPs and the Government and the Civil Service aren't batshit crazy.
It doesn't matter any longer what "the people" think because what they voted for has transpired to be an illusion. We aren't going to allow ourselves to be smashed onto the rocks because of "will of the people" - and that will would be brought into focus very quickly if we did and the consequences bring ruin to them.
We aren't leaving on 29th March.
I think you may be right. The big problem is there are very few sensible politicians in the H/C at the moment and there may not be enough to avert the coming shambles. The deal is kinda crap but it is slightly better than most sensible people expected. It also very well reflects the balance of the Referendum vote. The Brextremists on the one hand and JC on the other are clinging to a mythical better alternative. As a result we could well end up staying in the EU and I will certainly shed no tears if that comes to pass.
Of course you won't be the one having to deal with the consequences of that betrayal.
Also hard to imagine how it could be much worse, what is left to give away.
No. We really arent. If we crash out in no deal, within a few months it will be like nothing changed as the hidden hand of the market works its magic as it always does, even more so in a global economy. But a no deal will create massive temporary unrest and could politically ruin those who get the blame.
A deal, of any kind in any way will make the 30th march exactly the same as the 29th march. Even a no deal with emergency grandfathered protections agreed at ten to midnight on the 29th will result in little change.
What this has shown up is a total lack of resilience in supply chains.
Seems pretty relevant the point where people can convince themselves they are being betrayed,simply because of a sanguine reaction from the other side.
Similarly when you see who May's deal pisses off its a reasonable guide that its ok....
Yes, in the short term. In the medium term possibly, though long term we're now probably going to remain so it'll be very divisive but not economically messed up.
I've given up wondering about anything but the short term. I just want to know there will be food, water and medicines in late March.
Easily taken in by the scaremongers, exact same tactics used in Scottish referendum and the wobbly jellies caved in even though it was absolute bollox.
'Damian Collins, the chair of the culture, media and sport select committee, invoked a rare parliamentary mechanism to compel the founder of a US software company, Six4Three, to hand over the documents during a business trip to London. In another exceptional move, parliament sent a serjeant at arms to his hotel with a final warning and a two-hour deadline to comply with its order. When the software firm founder failed to do so, it’s understood he was escorted to parliament. He was told he risked fines and even imprisonment if he didn’t hand over the documents.'
This is a #longread from yesterday's Guardian also on Fishing and Brexit based on the journalist spending four days aboard. Again folk are allowed to tell their own stories in their own way but you can pick up the editorial satire with the Latvian angle.
Foster on Marr confirms she will review confidence and supply deal with the Tories if her Deal goes through but she does not think she can get it through.
Does not confirm either she will support May's Tories on confidence and supply even if her Deal is voted down but would have to look at the circumstances. Suggests could be a general election in January if the DUP vote down May's government
For an election to take place on January 31st Parliament will have to be dissolved before the Xmas recess. Is that likely?
It could happen. And Parliament can amend the FTPA.
Yes, in the short term. In the medium term possibly, though long term we're now probably going to remain so it'll be very divisive but not economically messed up.
I've given up wondering about anything but the short term. I just want to know there will be food, water and medicines in late March.
Easily taken in by the scaremongers, exact same tactics used in Scottish referendum and the wobbly jellies caved in even though it was absolute bollox.
scaremongering works, especially if there's a grain of truth in them.
One wonders how mars created chocolate bars and north west water chlorinated their water before the Single Market
Foster on Marr confirms she will review confidence and supply deal with the Tories if her Deal goes through but she does not think she can get it through.
Does not confirm either she will support May's Tories on confidence and supply even if her Deal is voted down but would have to look at the circumstances. Suggests could be a general election in January if the DUP vote down May's government
For an election to take place on January 31st Parliament will have to be dissolved before the Xmas recess. Is that likely?
So has anyone from leave articulated what TMay's "lies" ( as YS puts it) are in their view?
We had some interesting comments from Grabcoque the other day about fishing. But there seemed to be very little detail behind the heat of his anger.
Detail is that they have sold out on CFP despite promises and the feeble 13 Scottish MP's promising to resign over it, be lucky if any one of them have the principles to go.
I think perhaps William Glenn and Southam Observer are right about May and I've just been naive and too traumatised by the referendum. Perhaps it should have been obvious how far May would go and much damage she would inflict to secure her place in the bottom quartile of PMs rather than the bottom decile.
And no ! I'm not Nicola Sturgeon.
I had a lot of respect for Theresa May until she went back on her word re-calling an early General Election. Never to be trusted again - 'Once a liar always a liar.'
How are you sure she was lying? When she said that she was not intending on calling an early GE, that might have been the case at the time.
So has anyone from leave articulated what TMay's "lies" ( as YS puts it) are in their view?
We had some interesting comments from Grabcoque the other day about fishing. But there seemed to be very little detail behind the heat of his anger.
Detail is that they have sold out on CFP despite promises and the feeble 13 Scottish MP's promising to resign over it, be lucky if any one of them have the principles to go.
How do you know that? The WA says we are leaving the CFP. Everything else is conjecture.
So has anyone from leave articulated what TMay's "lies" ( as YS puts it) are in their view?
We had some interesting comments from Grabcoque the other day about fishing. But there seemed to be very little detail behind the heat of his anger.
Detail is that they have sold out on CFP despite promises and the feeble 13 Scottish MP's promising to resign over it, be lucky if any one of them have the principles to go.
Unlike the SNP who want to remain part of the CFP......
So has anyone from leave articulated what TMay's "lies" ( as YS puts it) are in their view?
We had some interesting comments from Grabcoque the other day about fishing. But there seemed to be very little detail behind the heat of his anger.
Detail is that they have sold out on CFP despite promises and the feeble 13 Scottish MP's promising to resign over it, be lucky if any one of them have the principles to go.
How do you know that? The WA says we are leaving the CFP. Everything else is conjecture.
We've agreed to negotiate a deal based on the existing CFP.
I see Lisa Nandy has now said it is inconceivable that she'll vote for the deal. That reduces the number of Labour MPs who've suggested that they might to 2 (Flint, Snell), though it's obviously quite likely that others have considered doing so but see no reason to go public.
Hunt's comment on TV today that a Parliamentary vote blocking "no deal" was possible after rejection but it would probably need a change of government deserves more attention than it's had. I'm sure he's seeing this as a warning to fellow-Tory MPs, but it certainly gives everyone else an incentive. That creates a new possible sequence:
1. Parliament votes down the deal by a big majority. 2. The markets go crazy. 3. May appeals for a new vote, and refuses any other alternative, but it becomes clear that it would fail. 4. The markets go crazier. 5. Parliament votes no confidence in May. 6. Corbyn offers a deal: 6 months in government to hold a Remain/Leave 2nd vote, followed by a new election. He guarantees no change in Ireland. 7. The DUP support it.
Unlikely? Yes IMO. Inconceivable? No.
What purpose would a second Remain/Leave vote serve ? And why would the DUP support the idea ?
And how would a second leave vote ‘guarantee no change in Ireland’ ?
Sound like a pile of fantasies (ie current Labour policy) to me.
So has anyone from leave articulated what TMay's "lies" ( as YS puts it) are in their view?
We had some interesting comments from Grabcoque the other day about fishing. But there seemed to be very little detail behind the heat of his anger.
Detail is that they have sold out on CFP despite promises and the feeble 13 Scottish MP's promising to resign over it, be lucky if any one of them have the principles to go.
How do you know that? The WA says we are leaving the CFP. Everything else is conjecture.
We've agreed to negotiate a deal based on the existing CFP.
thats not what she said in her statement to parliament...
I think perhaps William Glenn and Southam Observer are right about May and I've just been naive and too traumatised by the referendum. Perhaps it should have been obvious how far May would go and much damage she would inflict to secure her place in the bottom quartile of PMs rather than the bottom decile.
And no ! I'm not Nicola Sturgeon.
I had a lot of respect for Theresa May until she went back on her word re-calling an early General Election. Never to be trusted again - 'Once a liar always a liar.'
Very true , it is hard to take her word on anything. If she can renege on such a large promise as not holding a snap election. I am surprised anyone believes her ,that she will eventually sanction another referendum. Especially if it lengthens her time as PM. As that seems to me, her main priority, not the national interest, that she repeats ad nauseam.
Juncker, Tusk, Merkel, Macron and others were in Office the day the EU signed a WDA with the UK
Not the legacy they would have wanted
And if Junckers had given a little to David Cameron this could have been avoided
With respect, I disagree. They've successfully killed off leave movements in other member countries, and it's quite likely that one way or other the UK will be back before long. The EU is way stronger than it was a year or so ago.
Juncker, Tusk, Merkel, Macron and others were in Office the day the EU signed a WDA with the UK
Not the legacy they would have wanted
And if Junckers had given a little to David Cameron this could have been avoided
They lost their second largest net contributor, the nation that most pushed them into moving away from sclerotic state aided socialism, which as done them no end of good. Our stroppiness could easily have been accounted for. But they laughed at us, and its good bye from us, even if makes both us and them a little poorer.
I would rather be a touch poorer and burn the wealth than give it to the EU.
Juncker, Tusk, Merkel, Macron and others were in Office the day the EU signed a WDA with the UK
Not the legacy they would have wanted
And if Junckers had given a little to David Cameron this could have been avoided
With respect, I disagree. They've successfully killed off leave movements in other member countries, and it's quite likely that one way or other the UK will be back before long. The EU is way stronger than it was a year or so ago.
Yeh right, with Italy and Greece both about to explode economically, & a worldwide downturn hitting just as the ECB withdraws QE.
I think perhaps William Glenn and Southam Observer are right about May and I've just been naive and too traumatised by the referendum. Perhaps it should have been obvious how far May would go and much damage she would inflict to secure her place in the bottom quartile of PMs rather than the bottom decile.
And no ! I'm not Nicola Sturgeon.
I had a lot of respect for Theresa May until she went back on her word re-calling an early General Election. Never to be trusted again - 'Once a liar always a liar.'
Very true , it is hard to take her word on anything. If she can renege on such a large promise as not holding a snap election. I am surprised anyone believes her ,that she will eventually sanction another referendum. Especially if it lengthens her time as PM. As that seems to me, her main priority, not the national interest, that she repeats ad nauseam.
Problem is that TM stands way in front in public opinion as best PM.
If deal does go through - Conservatives only and immediate concern will be staying in power which requires DUP support.
That surely implies May would have to go and that winner of contest will be someone who is DUP friendly - ie Johnson or somebody who says what Johnson said yesterday.
If the Deal goes through Parliament will have voted for it as law so the DUP will support a VONC in the government before they have a chance to elect a new leader, hence a general election is likely if May gets her Deal through. If she does not either No Deal or EUref2 are more likely, though a general election is still possible if May keeps trying for the Deal in which case the DUP will also support a VONC
You do post with such certainty but there are several other possibilities
No there aren't, the EU have made clear they are not going to reopen negotiations so the above are the only alternatives
You do at times lay yourself wide open. You have no idea how the EU will act if this falls.
We know exactly as the EU have set the best terms they are willing to offer and as they have made abundantly clear they have their own domestic issues to deal with and are not going to offer any more favourable terms to a country that has voted to leave the EU
I do not accept that until it is actually challenged post the deal failing
If there is to be any further concessions it will be from the UK on permanent single market and/or customs union or indeed a reversal of Brexit after EUref2, the EU is not budging
Foster on Marr confirms she will review confidence and supply deal with the Tories if her Deal goes through but she does not think she can get it through.
Does not confirm either she will support May's Tories on confidence and supply even if her Deal is voted down but would have to look at the circumstances. Suggests could be a general election in January if the DUP vote down May's government
For an election to take place on January 31st Parliament will have to be dissolved before the Xmas recess. Is that likely?
Quite possibly if the DUP back a VONC in the government before Christmas
As Arlene has made this statement it is very clear that the DUP expecting a VONC in which they vote no confidence is precisely what she is expecting. All of the assumption is that Corbyn would raise the confidence motion. Be funny if the DUP did it...
If I were Corbyn I'd be quite happy to let the DUP put the actual motion down.
Foster on Marr confirms she will review confidence and supply deal with the Tories if her Deal goes through but she does not think she can get it through.
Does not confirm either she will support May's Tories on confidence and supply even if her Deal is voted down but would have to look at the circumstances. Suggests could be a general election in January if the DUP vote down May's government
For an election to take place on January 31st Parliament will have to be dissolved before the Xmas recess. Is that likely?
Quite possibly if the DUP back a VONC in the government before Christmas
As Arlene has made this statement it is very clear that the DUP expecting a VONC in which they vote no confidence is precisely what she is expecting. All of the assumption is that Corbyn would raise the confidence motion. Be funny if the DUP did it...
Comments
I am not making 'a fuss', or trying to get anyone banned, I am sure that Yellow submarine is a valued poster and a good person. However, his clear call for an elected politician to be disposed of by any means necessary, including fairly explicitly asking for the intelligence community to do 'their duty' should have no place here.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_Spanish_general_election
Look at the leads in the last 10 or so polls.
We'll end up crashing out - which will be a disaster / won't be so bad.
We'll have a 2nd referendum - Deal v No Deal / Deal v Remain / No Deal v Remain / all 3 via AV.
May will get her deal through after the EU flex / don't flex.
May will resign / be forced out / stay.
There will be a GE - won be Labour / the Tories / no one.
My head will explode.
(The last one is probably most certain.)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-46302030
This is a betting site and, while I do not bet, lots money must be won and lost on all this
Hunt's comment on TV today that a Parliamentary vote blocking "no deal" was possible after rejection but it would probably need a change of government deserves more attention than it's had. I'm sure he's seeing this as a warning to fellow-Tory MPs, but it certainly gives everyone else an incentive. That creates a new possible sequence:
1. Parliament votes down the deal by a big majority.
2. The markets go crazy.
3. May appeals for a new vote, and refuses any other alternative, but it becomes clear that it would fail.
4. The markets go crazier.
5. Parliament votes no confidence in May.
6. Corbyn offers a deal: 6 months in government to hold a Remain/Leave 2nd vote, followed by a new election. He guarantees no change in Ireland.
7. The DUP support it.
Unlikely? Yes IMO. Inconceivable? No.
"Mrs Foster has already said if the government's deal gets passed in the Commons, the DUP will have to review the confidence and supply pact.
"We'll review it at that point in time: things are fluid, things change - we'll have to see where we are," she added.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-46335118
(PS I still think most likely that a few sections of MPs will fold/abstain and May will somehow get her deal.)
Its all about small-m momentum...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IVHP1wxqg8U
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/nov/25/fishermen-betrayal-brexit-eu-policy-talks-stalemate
The problem we have is two fold - it is perceived as too bad for too many to back it, and those who might be willing to consider it as better than no deal see no reason to back it as they see Remain as possible.
Without the latter I think it would fall, but perhaps not by so much that it was inconceivable it might pass on the second attempt. But because of it it will fail by 150 or so, too much to be salvaged.
Edit: the above may not be correct. The five days specified for the Lords under the EU(W)A are sitting days, whereas the 14 under the FTPA are solar days.
A deal, of any kind in any way will make the 30th march exactly the same as the 29th march. Even a no deal with emergency grandfathered protections agreed at ten to midnight on the 29th will result in little change.
What this has shown up is a total lack of resilience in supply chains.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/nov/24/mps-seize-cache-facebook-internal-papers
'Damian Collins, the chair of the culture, media and sport select committee, invoked a rare parliamentary mechanism to compel the founder of a US software company, Six4Three, to hand over the documents during a business trip to London. In another exceptional move, parliament sent a serjeant at arms to his hotel with a final warning and a two-hour deadline to comply with its order. When the software firm founder failed to do so, it’s understood he was escorted to parliament. He was told he risked fines and even imprisonment if he didn’t hand over the documents.'
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/nov/24/want-better-deal-talking-brexit-fishing-trawler
One wonders how mars created chocolate bars and north west water chlorinated their water before the Single Market
And why would the DUP support the idea ?
And how would a second leave vote ‘guarantee no change in Ireland’ ?
Sound like a pile of fantasies (ie current Labour policy) to me.
Juncker, Tusk, Merkel, Macron and others were in Office the day the EU signed a WDA with the UK
Not the legacy they would have wanted
And if Junckers had given a little to David Cameron this could have been avoided
If she can renege on such a large promise as not holding a snap election.
I am surprised anyone believes her ,that she will eventually sanction another referendum.
Especially if it lengthens her time as PM.
As that seems to me, her main priority, not the national interest, that she repeats ad nauseam.
I would rather be a touch poorer and burn the wealth than give it to the EU.
Maybe some kind of brake might have sneaked it.