I still expect the vote to fail, but it will be interesting to see how many Tories blink when faced with the dark reality of the World According to Jacob Rees-Mogg.
However many Tories blink, it won't be enough to get it through....
Yes, the Deal is doomed. The only question now is who will be presenting its identical replacement to parliament this time next year - Boris or DD.
You forgot the national government option.
With the hard left having a strong position in labour at the moment, national government would’ve made a great deal of sense. It would’ve bought all the leavers together. If Brexit was ever going to work it had to be on a non-party basis. I think the moment has passed now though.
Surely the game is up when some of the die-hard PB Tories are already finger pointing at Corbyn for the unfolding fiasco that lies ahead.
Corbyn is responsible for a lot of things, particularly the brick-by-brick demolition of his own party's electability. Brexit however is a train wreck painted blue!
Reading this thread, I see the 'Remain Media' is now also being fingered. Pretty much everyone's to blame except for those who spent decades agitating for this precise scenario.
Can someone tell me what it is in this WA that prevents a future Labour government delivering it's "alternative plan for a sensible deal..." (including all the elements he outlines)... assuming they are in power to negotiate the final deal?
Friend of mine got a kicking once for trying to work - nice bunch eh?
40 years or more ago and the memory still lingers as presumably does the belief Corbyn will bring back Union power.
As there are hardly any Union members left any more, I doubt it would mean anything.
My remark slightly in jest but you catch more flies with honey than with flypaper. In any case, Corbyn is playing politics with this and he is a politician so there's no surprise.
He is also trying to be all things to all people which is exactly what May was about between 2016 and the disastrous GE.
That’s flat wrong. Unions are there throughout the public sector and if they’re is one thing that interests the Labour leadership, it is an inherent belief in the virtue of the state. So much so that they wish to expand it hugely.
Let’s not forget - without Gina Miller there would be no opportunity for Parliament to reject May’s steaming pile of ordure.
Yet another of the guilty (wo)men that'll history won't look kindly upon when we crash out. There's a reason this sort of power normally rests with the government.
Parliamentary sovereignty except when it disagrees with the executive = fascism.
So the May apologists like you are going to lead us all over the cliff in March because we won't accept the Prime Minister's blessed "Deal"?
To be fair, I've read the letter May has written to me and if the letter matched the content of the Deal no one could possibly be in opposition as it reads like the fulfilment of every LEAVE voter's fantasies short of Barnier and Juncker coming down every garden path in the UK and personally delivering each elector £1000 in twenty pound notes.
Yet the vast majority of MPs and many others are opposed so what do they see that May doesn't or rather what don't they see that May does? Does the Prime Minister REALLY believe this is the best deal we could have got or is it simply the British deal she could get?
I didn't vote to leave and put us in this mess, Stodge.
Let’s not forget - without Gina Miller there would be no opportunity for Parliament to reject May’s steaming pile of ordure.
Yet another of the guilty (wo)men that'll history won't look kindly upon when we crash out. There's a reason this sort of power normally rests with the government.
The actions of a lot of Remainers from Tony Blair down have probably made "No Deal" much more likely that it would otherwise have been...
No. The thing that made No Deal much more likely was May's Citizens of Nowhere speech that accepted the Brexiteer notion of a cake and eat it Brexit. The EU were fairly clear from day one what was and what wasn't up for negotiation, but she bought and then purveyed the idea that they'd miraculously back down when you have a trade bloc of 27 countries with its own red lines that is quite happy going toe-to-toe with the U.S. and China in negotiations. That was her moment when she was strong enough to be candid about the realities of Brexit - that to do it right would take a decade or more, mean first going into looser existing arrangements like the EEA/EFTA and that the dislocation of a quick clean break just wasn't possible without immense harm. That would've probably united the country around the practical and possible, with the exception of the die hards on the leave and remain side.
Plus, its rhetoric and her repetition of it had the added side-effect of alienating Tory and potential Tory remain voters who might have given her a majority if they felt the government was offering to allay some of their fears about loss of rights, economic problems etc.
Blair has been peripheral to the whole process, while the reason remainers have become more intransigent is the above - there was no attempt to unite the country, only indulge the fantasists in the ERG - who then inevitably turned round and blamed her when those fantasies collided with reality. Remainers have become more determined the more they believe they stand to lose - which is the problem - she and Brexiteers never tried to win people round to a compromise.
So I expect on December 12th we are going to be in interesting times...
Sounds like Corbyn would be open to an arrangement with Theresa May providing she made some commitment to a high integration end state.
I think "a permanent customs union with a UK say" gives the lie to that. He doesn't want his tests to be passable under any circumstances.
There won't be a meaningful say without membership of the EU. That's a given. The question is what Corbyn is prepared to sign up to. This hints he is prepared to sign up or abstain if May commits to Norway+ in my opinion. May will hate that because she's a very partisan politician. But it gives her a potential out.
In the end it may come down to whether May, and the Conservative party more broadly, prefer an undisguised BINO stitch up or a second referendum. I think they'd prefer the latter.
Nicola Sturgeon is backing Norway as she sees it as the best option and takes out the CFP. I really do think this is the end state. On the assumption the deal falls TM calls all the opposition leaders together and offers a unity deal of Norway. It puts most conservatives, the SNP and the DUP, together with a large number of labour mps and would pass the HOC and HOL quickly
Let’s not forget - without Gina Miller there would be no opportunity for Parliament to reject May’s steaming pile of ordure.
Yet another of the guilty (wo)men that'll history won't look kindly upon when we crash out. There's a reason this sort of power normally rests with the government.
Parliamentary sovereignty except when it disagrees with the executive = fascism.
Surely the game is up when some of the die-hard PB Tories are already finger pointing at Corbyn for the unfolding fiasco that lies ahead.
Corbyn is responsible for a lot of things, particularly the brick-by-brick demolition of his own party's electability. Brexit however is a train wreck painted blue!
Reading this thread, I see the 'Remain Media' is now also being fingered. Pretty much everyone's to blame except for those who spent decades agitating for this precise scenario.
It is why I think Corbyn did the sensible thing by not adopting the Lib Dem position on Brexit. Those searching for a betrayal narrative struggle to come up with Corbyn or Labour as the cause, when May needed a name to attach to the people trying to stop Brexit that people voted for she ended up having to mention Sadiq Khan. Even the craziest people would struggle to be convinced the Mayor of London will be to blame should Brexit not happen.
As the government it would be difficult to blame others anyway but I think Labours tactics have left the Conservatives completely without a Labour bogeyman to believably blame.
Can someone tell me what it is in this WA that prevents a future Labour government delivering it's "alternative plan for a sensible deal..." (including all the elements he outlines)... assuming they are in power to negotiate the final deal?
Nothing - he is playing politics and I hope it backfires
Surely the game is up when some of the die-hard PB Tories are already finger pointing at Corbyn for the unfolding fiasco that lies ahead.
Corbyn is responsible for a lot of things, particularly the brick-by-brick demolition of his own party's electability. Brexit however is a train wreck painted blue!
Reading this thread, I see the 'Remain Media' is now also being fingered. Pretty much everyone's to blame except for those who spent decades agitating for this precise scenario.
Surely the game is up when some of the die-hard PB Tories are already finger pointing at Corbyn for the unfolding fiasco that lies ahead.
Corbyn is responsible for a lot of things, particularly the brick-by-brick demolition of his own party's electability. Brexit however is a train wreck painted blue!
Reading this thread, I see the 'Remain Media' is now also being fingered. Pretty much everyone's to blame except for those who spent decades agitating for this precise scenario.
In truth we are all to blame in some way
Actually I don't think those of us that voted to remain and are accepting of the deal are, @Big_G_Northwales
Can someone tell me what it is in this WA that prevents a future Labour government delivering it's "alternative plan for a sensible deal..." (including all the elements he outlines)... assuming they are in power to negotiate the final deal?
Nothing. It's nonsense. Being generous, it's that Corbyn would include some aspects of the future arrangement in the WA - tying the hands of a future government to Labour's preferences. But a) why on Earth would any government do that? It's pretty anti-democratic and would potentially create huge problems if, say, the EU change their protections in a way we're unhappy with. b) If you do want those guarantees, you might as well argue for an EEA/EFTA option, or remain - unless your major bugbear is specifically freedom of movement.
So in effect, the only logical reason to hold that position is not liking foreigners coming over here. Now, Jeremy Corbyn is many things, many of them utterly dismal, but he's not a Faragist Little Englander.
There are good reasons to oppose the deal. That doesn't mean people blithely promising a brand new deal (it would have to be substantially different, as the criticisms are on fundamental aspects) are not being irresponsible. If someone doesn't want this deal, the timing is difficult to arrange a new one, and the EU have to be willing. If they are to vote against they need to be prepared to accept both remain and no deal as potential reactions, yet most are still pretending that we must not do one or the other, but that the EU will do exactly as we want. They might as well be Davis talking about the easiest deal in history, and I seem to recall plenty of people criticised that attitude, but now it is totally acceptable for people to just promise it will all work out in some vague fashion? Characterisation of that as May apologism seems distinctly unreasonable
The problem I have is May's letter to the British people "suggests" a number of benefits that would appease all but the most stubborn LEAVE voter. It sounds wonderful but if I've learned nothing else in this life, if something is too good to be true, it probably is and if something is too bad to be true, it probably isn't.
If the Deal matched up to the claims in the letter, the opposition to it would be minimal so something is wrong somewhere. You yourself claim there are "good reasons" to oppose it.
All the Deal's supporters seem to have to work with are the consequences of its rejection. Now, the loss of May as Prime Minister doesn't bother me in the least and nor am I taken in by the alarmist prophecies of the "we must have a Deal" brigade. If we have made insufficient preparation for No Deal the Government is accountable for all that follows just as Cameron was for no preparation for a LEAVE vote in 2016.
I'd like the Government and its supporters to be accountable and to show some accountability rather than blame Corbyn, the EU, the "Remainer mafia", the "metropolitan liberal elite" and all the other nonsense but what we get is a blizzard of obfuscation and Project Fear.
To be fair, leaving without a Deal would meet May's main criteria of getting us out of the EU on 29/3/19 while the Deal keeps us effectively in the EU until perhaps 31/12/20 or 31/12/22 or some other date to be determined.
Let’s not forget - without Gina Miller there would be no opportunity for Parliament to reject May’s steaming pile of ordure.
Yet another of the guilty (wo)men that'll history won't look kindly upon when we crash out. There's a reason this sort of power normally rests with the government.
The actions of a lot of Remainers from Tony Blair down have probably made "No Deal" much more likely that it would otherwise have been...
No. The thing that made No Deal much more likely was May's Citizens of Nowhere speech that accepted the Brexiteer notion of a cake and eat it Brexit. The EU were fairly clear from day one what was and what wasn't up for negotiation, but she bought and then purveyed the idea that they'd miraculously back down when you have a trade bloc of 27 countries with its own red lines that is quite happy going toe-to-toe with the U.S. and China in negotiations. That was her moment when she was strong enough to be candid about the realities of Brexit - that to do it right would take a decade or more, mean first going into looser existing arrangements like the EEA/EFTA and that the dislocation of a quick clean break just wasn't possible without immense harm. That would've probably united the country around the practical and possible, with the exception of the die hards on the leave and remain side.
Plus, its rhetoric and her repetition of it had the added side-effect of alienating Tory and potential Tory remain voters who might have given her a majority if they felt the government was offering to allay some of their fears about loss of rights, economic problems etc.
Blair has been peripheral to the whole process, while the reason remainers have become more intransigent is the above - there was no attempt to unite the country, only indulge the fantasists in the ERG - who then inevitably turned round and blamed her when those fantasies collided with reality. Remainers have become more determined the more they believe they stand to lose - which is the problem - she and Brexiteers never tried to win people round to a compromise.
Yes, Theresa's behaviour in that early part of her reign is baffling. Love or hate her, she's clearly a technocrat, and grinding solutions and grubby compromises are her thing. Why she pandered to the wands-and-fairies fantasies of the Leavers and stored all this trouble up for herself is a mystery. Surely it wasn't all about pleasing Dacre and getting a few of his ludicrous Mail headlines.
That’s flat wrong. Unions are there throughout the public sector and if they’re is one thing that interests the Labour leadership, it is an inherent belief in the virtue of the state. So much so that they wish to expand it hugely.
Yes, Unions exist in the public sector but does that mean the same appetite for militancy exists now as in the 1970s? I suspect not though attacks on pension rights do seem to get many public sector workers very angry - I wonder why?
Yes, Theresa's behaviour in that early part of her reign is baffling. Love or hate her, she's clearly a technocrat, and grinding solutions and grubby compromises are her thing. Why she pandered to the wands-and-fairies fantasies of the Leavers and stored all this trouble up for herself is a mystery. Surely it wasn't all about pleasing Dacre and getting a few of his ludicrous Mail headlines.
The memoirs will be fascinating. If we all live that long...
Surely the game is up when some of the die-hard PB Tories are already finger pointing at Corbyn for the unfolding fiasco that lies ahead.
Corbyn is responsible for a lot of things, particularly the brick-by-brick demolition of his own party's electability. Brexit however is a train wreck painted blue!
Reading this thread, I see the 'Remain Media' is now also being fingered. Pretty much everyone's to blame except for those who spent decades agitating for this precise scenario.
In truth we are all to blame in some way
Actually I don't think those of us that voted to remain and are accepting of the deal are, @Big_G_Northwales
Let’s not forget - without Gina Miller there would be no opportunity for Parliament to reject May’s steaming pile of ordure.
Yet another of the guilty (wo)men that'll history won't look kindly upon when we crash out. There's a reason this sort of power normally rests with the government.
The actions of a lot of Remainers from Tony Blair down have probably made "No Deal" much more likely that it would otherwise have been...
No. The thing that made No Deal much more likely was May's Citizens of Nowhere speech that accepted the Brexiteer notion of a cake and eat it Brexit. The EU were fairly clear from day one what was and what wasn't up for negotiation, but she bought and then purveyed the idea that they'd miraculously back down when you have a trade bloc of 27 countries with its own red lines that is quite happy going toe-to-toe with the U.S. and China in negotiations. That was her moment when she was strong enough to be candid about the realities of Brexit - that to do it right would take a decade or more, mean first going into looser existing arrangements like the EEA/EFTA and that the dislocation of a quick clean break just wasn't possible without immense harm. That would've probably united the country around the practical and possible, with the exception of the die hards on the leave and remain side.
Plus, its rhetoric and her repetition of it had the added side-effect of alienating Tory and potential Tory remain voters who might have given her a majority if they felt the government was offering to allay some of their fears about loss of rights, economic problems etc.
Blair has been peripheral to the whole process, while the reason remainers have become more intransigent is the above - there was no attempt to unite the country, only indulge the fantasists in the ERG - who then inevitably turned round and blamed her when those fantasies collided with reality. Remainers have become more determined the more they believe they stand to lose - which is the problem - she and Brexiteers never tried to win people round to a compromise.
Yes, Theresa's behaviour in that early part of her reign is baffling. Love or hate her, she's clearly a technocrat, and grinding solutions and grubby compromises are her thing. Why she pandered to the wands-and-fairies fantasies of the Leavers and stored all this trouble up for herself is a mystery. Surely it wasn't all about pleasing Dacre and getting a few of his ludicrous Mail headlines.
I suggest she was insecure of her position, having spoken up for Remain in 2016, and saw the principal threat at the time coming from the Wee Smog and his ERG'ers, hence needed to pander to them to buy herself time.
Surely the game is up when some of the die-hard PB Tories are already finger pointing at Corbyn for the unfolding fiasco that lies ahead.
Corbyn is responsible for a lot of things, particularly the brick-by-brick demolition of his own party's electability. Brexit however is a train wreck painted blue!
Reading this thread, I see the 'Remain Media' is now also being fingered. Pretty much everyone's to blame except for those who spent decades agitating for this precise scenario.
It is why I think Corbyn did the sensible thing by not adopting the Lib Dem position on Brexit. Those searching for a betrayal narrative struggle to come up with Corbyn or Labour as the cause, when May needed a name to attach to the people trying to stop Brexit that people voted for she ended up having to mention Sadiq Khan. Even the craziest people would struggle to be convinced the Mayor of London will be to blame should Brexit not happen.
As the government it would be difficult to blame others anyway but I think Labours tactics have left the Conservatives completely without a Labour bogeyman to believably blame.
If you are right labour and Corbyn will rocket up the polls but I am not holding my breath
In fact the polling over the next two weeks is going to be fascinating
So I expect on December 12th we are going to be in interesting times...
Sounds like Corbyn would be open to an arrangement with Theresa May providing she made some commitment to a high integration end state.
I think "a permanent customs union with a UK say" gives the lie to that. He doesn't want his tests to be passable under any circumstances.
There won't be a meaningful say without membership of the EU. That's a given. The question is what Corbyn is prepared to sign up to. This hints he is prepared to sign up or abstain if May commits to Norway+ in my opinion. May will hate that because she's a very partisan politician. But it gives her a potential out.
In the end it may come down to whether May, and the Conservative party more broadly, prefer an undisguised BINO stitch up or a second referendum. I think they'd prefer the latter.
Nicola Sturgeon is backing Norway as she sees it as the best option and takes out the CFP. I really do think this is the end state. On the assumption the deal falls TM calls all the opposition leaders together and offers a unity deal of Norway. It puts most conservatives, the SNP and the DUP, together with a large number of labour mps and would pass the HOC and HOL quickly
Would have been a sensible place for the PM to have started, had she had the political capital to bring it off. Perhaps that was why she called the 2017 GE after all?
Mr. Pulpstar, had we had the promised referendum on Lisbon, the situation would be far better. The electorate could've expressed its scepticism and desire for an end to ever greater integration without the nuclear option being the only one left.
For decades we were integrated ever closer without the political establishment ever asking the electorate if they agreed, refusing a referendum even when one was explicitly promised in the winning party's manifesto.
Undoubtedly, the current situation is fraught, tempestuous, and not overflowing with political competence. That said, blaming the referendum result rather than decades of unwanted integration may be akin to Aron Ralston blaming his penknife rather than the boulder.
Suppose we'd voted the other way, by the same margin. And more integration occurred. Would we get another referendum then? Very unlikely, in my view. At what point does democratic consent for national powers being frittered away (even against manifesto pledges to the contrary) become an irrelevance?
Let’s not forget - without Gina Miller there would be no opportunity for Parliament to reject May’s steaming pile of ordure.
Yet another of the guilty (wo)men that'll history won't look kindly upon when we crash out. There's a reason this sort of power normally rests with the government.
The actions of a lot of Remainers from Tony Blair down have probably made "No Deal" much more likely that it would otherwise have been...
Plus, its rhetoric and her repetition of it had the added side-effect of alienating Tory and potential Tory remain voters who might have given her a majority if they felt the government was offering to allay some of their fears about loss of rights, economic problems etc.
Blair has been peripheral to the whole process, while the reason remainers have become more intransigent is the above - there was no attempt to unite the country, only indulge the fantasists in the ERG - who then inevitably turned round and blamed her when those fantasies collided with reality. Remainers have become more determined the more they believe they stand to lose - which is the problem - she and Brexiteers never tried to win people round to a compromise.
Yes, Theresa's behaviour in that early part of her reign is baffling. Love or hate her, she's clearly a technocrat, and grinding solutions and grubby compromises are her thing. Why she pandered to the wands-and-fairies fantasies of the Leavers and stored all this trouble up for herself is a mystery. Surely it wasn't all about pleasing Dacre and getting a few of his ludicrous Mail headlines.
I suggest she was insecure of her position, having spoken up for Remain in 2016, and saw the principal threat at the time coming from the Wee Smog and his ERG'ers, hence needed to pander to them to buy herself time.
Apparently it is "pandering" to support the obvious interpretation of the Leave vote, including the control of immigration and laws that most nations in the world have.
Voting for the deal would be the least bad choice from here for the nation. But for the foreseeable future Britain looks set to take a worse choice at every opportunity.
Brexiteer: Brexit will be great! Remainer: It's a bad idea.
Brexiteer: Brexit will be fine! Remainer: It's a bad idea.
Brexiteer: Brexit will be not as bad as war. Remainer: It's a bad idea.
Brexiteer: Brexit will be not as bad as famine. Remainer: It's a bad idea.
Brexiteer: Hey, Brexit is really bad! Remainer: It's a bad idea.
Brexiteer: It's those fucking Remainers' fault...
It will be Remainers that are voting down a Brexit deal that fulfills most of the benefits of leaving with most of the benefits of remaining. It is the "cake and eat it" deal you lot said wasn't possible.
If we crash it won't be because the deal was bad. It will be because Remain MPs deliberately blocked it. Take some responsibility.
Surely the game is up when some of the die-hard PB Tories are already finger pointing at Corbyn for the unfolding fiasco that lies ahead.
Corbyn is responsible for a lot of things, particularly the brick-by-brick demolition of his own party's electability. Brexit however is a train wreck painted blue!
Reading this thread, I see the 'Remain Media' is now also being fingered. Pretty much everyone's to blame except for those who spent decades agitating for this precise scenario.
It is why I think Corbyn did the sensible thing by not adopting the Lib Dem position on Brexit. Those searching for a betrayal narrative struggle to come up with Corbyn or Labour as the cause, when May needed a name to attach to the people trying to stop Brexit that people voted for she ended up having to mention Sadiq Khan. Even the craziest people would struggle to be convinced the Mayor of London will be to blame should Brexit not happen.
As the government it would be difficult to blame others anyway but I think Labours tactics have left the Conservatives completely without a Labour bogeyman to believably blame.
If you are right labour and Corbyn will rocket up the polls but I am not holding my breath
In fact the polling over the next two weeks is going to be fascinating
If I am right then the blame for anything Brexit will fall on the Conservatives (more so than others) although that does require the situation to come to a head and there to be fall out from it, so maybe not the next two weeks. Also it would likely dent support for the Conservatives rather than necessarily boost Labour.
Edit: Presumably those annoyed at the Conservatives from a more centrist remainy politics would more likely go Lib Dem.
Voting for the deal would be the least bad choice from here for the nation. But for the foreseeable future Britain looks set to take a worse choice at every opportunity.
Any crash that happens won't because be Brexit happened. It will be because the deal that makes Brexit works was voted down. Blame for that goes in proportion to the size of the groups voting it down, with Labour Remainers making up the largest chunk.
So I expect on December 12th we are going to be in interesting times...
Sounds like Corbyn would be open to an arrangement with Theresa May providing she made some commitment to a high integration end state.
I think "a permanent customs union with a UK say" gives the lie to that. He doesn't want his tests to be passable under any circumstances.
There won't be a meaningful say without membership of the EU. That's a given. The question is what Corbyn is prepared to sign up to. This hints he is prepared to sign up or abstain if May commits to Norway+ in my opinion. May will hate that because she's a very partisan politician. But it gives her a potential out.
In the end it may come down to whether May, and the Conservative party more broadly, prefer an undisguised BINO stitch up or a second referendum. I think they'd prefer the latter.
Nicola Sturgeon is backing Norway as she sees it as the best option and takes out the CFP. I really do think this is the end state. On the assumption the deal falls TM calls all the opposition leaders together and offers a unity deal of Norway. It puts most conservatives, the SNP and the DUP, together with a large number of labour mps and would pass the HOC and HOL quickly
Would have been a sensible place for the PM to have started, had she had the political capital to bring it off. Perhaps that was why she called the 2017 GE after all?
She would not have lasted a minute due to free movement. However, she now has an actual deal addressing these issues. If the HOC rejects the deal, Norway does seem the path to putting the matter to bed
Voting for the deal would be the least bad choice from here for the nation. But for the foreseeable future Britain looks set to take a worse choice at every opportunity.
Any crash that happens won't because be Brexit happened. It will be because the deal that makes Brexit works was voted down. Blame for that goes in proportion to the size of the groups voting it down, with Labour Remainers making up the largest chunk.
BTW, can anyone explain to me why the professional UK commentariat, who really should know better, tend to credulously believe any statement made by an EU politician as 100% fact?
Is this an exoticism bias? All UK politicians are liars, all EU politicians are honest?
Voting for the deal would be the least bad choice from here for the nation. But for the foreseeable future Britain looks set to take a worse choice at every opportunity.
Any crash that happens won't because be Brexit happened. It will be because the deal that makes Brexit works was voted down. Blame for that goes in proportion to the size of the groups voting it down, with Labour Remainers making up the largest chunk.
Don't be ridiculous! This is blue owned mess. The Tories need to take full responsibility for our calamitous position. Thanks to the Tories, we are the laughing stock of the world (bar Sri Lanka of course!)
Voting for the deal would be the least bad choice from here for the nation. But for the foreseeable future Britain looks set to take a worse choice at every opportunity.
Any crash that happens won't because be Brexit happened. It will be because the deal that makes Brexit works was voted down. Blame for that goes in proportion to the size of the groups voting it down, with Labour Remainers making up the largest chunk.
If May thinks she can marshal market chaos as some kind of weapon against her own party she's playing with fire.
She'd be unleashing forces she can't control and doesn't understand.
Surely the game is up when some of the die-hard PB Tories are already finger pointing at Corbyn for the unfolding fiasco that lies ahead.
Corbyn is responsible for a lot of things, particularly the brick-by-brick demolition of his own party's electability. Brexit however is a train wreck painted blue!
Reading this thread, I see the 'Remain Media' is now also being fingered. Pretty much everyone's to blame except for those who spent decades agitating for this precise scenario.
Voting for the deal would be the least bad choice from here for the nation. But for the foreseeable future Britain looks set to take a worse choice at every opportunity.
Any crash that happens won't because be Brexit happened. It will be because the deal that makes Brexit works was voted down. Blame for that goes in proportion to the size of the groups voting it down, with Labour Remainers making up the largest chunk.
It’s a shit deal. It’s also as good as Britain has on offer from here. The referendum vote really was the dolorous blow.
So I expect on December 12th we are going to be in interesting times...
Sounds like Corbyn would be open to an arrangement with Theresa May providing she made some commitment to a high integration end state.
I think "a permanent customs union with a UK say" gives the lie to that. He doesn't want his tests to be passable under any circumstances.
There won't be a meaningful say without membership of the EU. That's a given. The question is what Corbyn is prepared to sign up to. This hints he is prepared to sign up or abstain if May commits to Norway+ in my opinion. May will hate that because she's a very partisan politician. But it gives her a potential out.
In the end it may come down to whether May, and the Conservative party more broadly, prefer an undisguised BINO stitch up or a second referendum. I think they'd prefer the latter.
That's possible. I have been struck by how much Leavers hate the Vassal State idea. Saying they should have thought of that earlier isn't particularly useful at this stage.
But if Corbyn makes a counter offer of Withdrawal Agreement as is, followed by negotiations for Single Market plus permanent customs union plus EU VAT area, would Tory MPs buy into that? Would Theresa May buy into it?
Surely the game is up when some of the die-hard PB Tories are already finger pointing at Corbyn for the unfolding fiasco that lies ahead.
Corbyn is responsible for a lot of things, particularly the brick-by-brick demolition of his own party's electability. Brexit however is a train wreck painted blue!
Reading this thread, I see the 'Remain Media' is now also being fingered. Pretty much everyone's to blame except for those who spent decades agitating for this precise scenario.
It is why I think Corbyn did the sensible thing by not adopting the Lib Dem position on Brexit. Those searching for a betrayal narrative struggle to come up with Corbyn or Labour as the cause, when May needed a name to attach to the people trying to stop Brexit that people voted for she ended up having to mention Sadiq Khan. Even the craziest people would struggle to be convinced the Mayor of London will be to blame should Brexit not happen.
As the government it would be difficult to blame others anyway but I think Labours tactics have left the Conservatives completely without a Labour bogeyman to believably blame.
If you are right labour and Corbyn will rocket up the polls but I am not holding my breath
In fact the polling over the next two weeks is going to be fascinating
If I am right then the blame for anything Brexit will fall on the Conservatives (more so than others) although that does require the situation to come to a head and there to be fall out from it, so maybe not the next two weeks. Also it would likely dent support for the Conservatives rather than necessarily boost Labour.
Edit: Presumably those annoyed at the Conservatives from a more centrist remainy politics would more likely go Lib Dem.
TBH whilst there's vast buckets of blame to go around on all sides, can I just point out that a never ending cycle of ass covering and blame and counter blame isn't going to get the UK out of the vast swamp of cold doodoo we're all standing shoulder deep in.
At some point, Parliament is going to have to stop the blame game, and come to a settled view on where to go next.
There'll be plenty of time for everyone to blame the entire sorry saga on Theresa May when we're firmly out of the woods.
Actually I don't think those of us that voted to remain and are accepting of the deal are, @Big_G_Northwales
Fair point (as is my position )
In other words, according to two pro-Government apologists, it's all the fault of everyone who disagrees with the Government.
To a degree the two extremes position have created the deadlock not those of us who have been pragmatic
May is a unifier which means she wants everyone in her Conservative tent. I understand it but it's not clever politics as eventually the tent collapses because of the contradictions and contortions involved trying to prop it up.
From June 2016, the Government had two choices - either, seek a "Hard" Brexit which would represent a clear break from the EEC/EU years - the risk was there would be no deal with the EU and we could crash out accordingly but the Government would plan to mitigate the economic disruption resulting (if there were any) and we would genuinely be in control of their laws and out economic destiny once again
The second option was to seek an arrangement closely resembling membership but outside the SM (because there had to be an end to Freedom of Movement). The "Soft" option would recognise continued EU involvement and some EU jurisdiction but had the advantages of being fairly easy to meet and minimising disruption.
After the disastrous 2017 GE, May had no option but to try to do both to keep the maximum number onside so she talked tough at home but was clearly angling for a BINO-style deal. These two contradictory views could be mollified verbally until the colour of the final Deal became clear and then all hell would be let loose as the Deal would end up satisfying no one but her loyalists.
Had she not fatally damaged her own authority, May could have stared down one side or the other and told them what the Deal was going to be and could have used her majority to get it through.
TBH whilst there's vast buckets of blame to go around on all sides, can I just point out that a never ending cycle of ass covering and blame and counter blame isn't going to get the UK out of the vast swamp of cold doodoo we're all standing shoulder deep in.
At some point, Parliament is going to have to stop the blame game, and come to a settled view on where to go next.
There'll be plenty of time for everyone to blame the entire sorry saga on Theresa May when we're firmly out of the woods.
» show previous quotes Saying they would like to change it whilst knowing that is impossible is dishonest.
Rubbish Richard, from inside they would try to change it, it would be difficult but not impossible , that is honest. Different from Tories blatantly lying that they have not sold Scottish fishermen down the Swanee.
So I expect on December 12th we are going to be in interesting times...
Sounds like Corbyn would be open to an arrangement with Theresa May providing she made some commitment to a high integration end state.
I think "a permanent customs union with a UK say" gives the lie to that. He doesn't want his tests to be passable under any circumstances.
There won't be a meaningful say without membership of the EU. That's a given. The question is what Corbyn is prepared to sign up to. This hints he is prepared to sign up or abstain if May commits to Norway+ in my opinion. May will hate that because she's a very partisan politician. But it gives her a potential out.
In the end it may come down to whether May, and the Conservative party more broadly, prefer an undisguised BINO stitch up or a second referendum. I think they'd prefer the latter.
It's a funny "name only" Brexit that returns control over immigration, makes British courts sovereign and reduces membership fees by billions.
TBH whilst there's vast buckets of blame to go around on all sides, can I just point out that a never ending cycle of ass covering and blame and counter blame isn't going to get the UK out of the vast swamp of cold doodoo we're all standing shoulder deep in.
At some point, Parliament is going to have to stop the blame game, and come to a settled view on where to go next.
There'll be plenty of time for everyone to blame the entire sorry saga on Theresa May when we're firmly out of the woods.
The time for a plan is BEFORE the vote. We have one with May's deal. Where is Labour's plan? Those are the vast bulk of the people voting it down.
BTW, can anyone explain to me why the professional UK commentariat, who really should know better, tend to credulously believe any statement made by an EU politician as 100% fact?
Is this an exoticism bias? All UK politicians are liars, all EU politicians are honest?
It does seem the media generally are very remain and rarely if ever have a go at the EU
Voting for the deal would be the least bad choice from here for the nation. But for the foreseeable future Britain looks set to take a worse choice at every opportunity.
Any crash that happens won't because be Brexit happened. It will be because the deal that makes Brexit works was voted down. Blame for that goes in proportion to the size of the groups voting it down, with Labour Remainers making up the largest chunk.
It’s a shit deal. It’s also as good as Britain has on offer from here. The referendum vote really was the dolorous blow.
It's a good deal for anyone who wants to control immigration. You dislike it because you like open borders.
So I expect on December 12th we are going to be in interesting times...
Sounds like Corbyn would be open to an arrangement with Theresa May providing she made some commitment to a high integration end state.
I think "a permanent customs union with a UK say" gives the lie to that. He doesn't want his tests to be passable under any circumstances.
There won't be a meaningful say without membership of the EU. That's a given. The question is what Corbyn is prepared to sign up to. This hints he is prepared to sign up or abstain if May commits to Norway+ in my opinion. May will hate that because she's a very partisan politician. But it gives her a potential out.
In the end it may come down to whether May, and the Conservative party more broadly, prefer an undisguised BINO stitch up or a second referendum. I think they'd prefer the latter.
It's a funny "name only" Brexit that returns control over immigration, makes British courts sovereign and reduces membership fees by billions.
Cabinet Ministers Hammond, Lidington, Gauke, Rudd and Clark set to urge May to back permanent UK membership of the Customs Union if she cannot get the Deal through on the first vote so she can then win over Labour support to get a Deal through
Surely the game is up when some of the die-hard PB Tories are already finger pointing at Corbyn for the unfolding fiasco that lies ahead.
Corbyn is responsible for a lot of things, particularly the brick-by-brick demolition of his own party's electability. Brexit however is a train wreck painted blue!
Reading this thread, I see the 'Remain Media' is now also being fingered. Pretty much everyone's to blame except for those who spent decades agitating for this precise scenario.
In truth we are all to blame in some way
In what way am I to blame?
Those campaigning to stop brexit and those ultra brexiteers are responsible for the deadlock
Voting for the deal would be the least bad choice from here for the nation. But for the foreseeable future Britain looks set to take a worse choice at every opportunity.
Any crash that happens won't because be Brexit happened. It will be because the deal that makes Brexit works was voted down. Blame for that goes in proportion to the size of the groups voting it down, with Labour Remainers making up the largest chunk.
Nah I think the ERG are probably the guiltiest of the guilty men. And the guiltiest of the them all is Boris Johnson
Ken Clarke is probably looking like the wisest head in parliament at the moment.
TBH whilst there's vast buckets of blame to go around on all sides, can I just point out that a never ending cycle of ass covering and blame and counter blame isn't going to get the UK out of the vast swamp of cold doodoo we're all standing shoulder deep in.
At some point, Parliament is going to have to stop the blame game, and come to a settled view on where to go next.
There'll be plenty of time for everyone to blame the entire sorry saga on Theresa May when we're firmly out of the woods.
The time for a plan is BEFORE the vote. We have one with May's deal. Where is Labour's plan? Those are the vast bulk of the people voting it down.
Well, it's a bad plan, so everyone else's plan is to kill May's bad plan.
Parliament may not agree on much, but it certainly looks like it is Parliament's settled will that Theresa May be strongly and stably humiliated in the national interest.
As for what comes after? Everyone is keeping their cards close to their chest. It's going to be ONE HELL of a game of no-limit political hold'em.
So I expect on December 12th we are going to be in interesting times...
Sounds like Corbyn would be open to an arrangement with Theresa May providing she made some commitment to a high integration end state.
I think "a permanent customs union with a UK say" gives the lie to that. He doesn't want his tests to be passable under any circumstances.
There won't be a meaningful say without membership of the EU. That's a given. The question is what Corbyn is prepared to sign up to. This hints he is prepared to sign up or abstain if May commits to Norway+ in my opinion. May will hate that because she's a very partisan politician. But it gives her a potential out.
In the end it may come down to whether May, and the Conservative party more broadly, prefer an undisguised BINO stitch up or a second referendum. I think they'd prefer the latter.
It's a funny "name only" Brexit that returns control over immigration, makes British courts sovereign and reduces membership fees by billions.
You are Rory Stewart and I claim my £5!
Rory Stewart, as a former provincial governor, is one of the few MPs who has actually experienced the realities of power. It is not surprising he is arguing for this deal, given his firm grasp of how things work in practice. Especially when compared to the charlatans and hacks in the Labour Party.
Cabinet Ministers Hammond, Lidington, Gauke, Rudd and Clarke set to urge May to back permanent UK membership of the Customs Union if she cannot get the Deal through on the first vote so she can then win over Labour support to get a Deal through
The deal is crap, more crap than before, but not as crap as it could be. Vote for it.
No. Just a Remain media deliberately distorting her words. This deal keeps economic access to the EU for manufacturing while getting rid of the huge membership cost and controlling immigration.
We're accepting the indivisibility of the four freedoms in writing. Once all domestic interests are taken into account as we get into trade negotiations, do you really think we'll end up introducing trade barriers?
The future relationship will be based on a balance of rights and obligations, taking into account the principles of each Party. This balance must ensure the autonomy of the Union’s decision making and be consistent with the Union’s principles, in particular with respect to the integrity of the Single Market and the Customs Union and the indivisibility of the four freedoms.
EU will fleece them on the trade deal and they have nowhere to go.
Cabinet Ministers Hammond, Lidington, Gauke, Rudd and Clarke set to urge May to back permanent UK membership of the Customs Union if she cannot get the Deal through on the first vote so she can then win over Labour support to get a Deal through
What was the thinking behind writing a "letter to the nation"? The document will get whacked all around cyberspace until there's nothing of it left. I could have told her that. The contemptuous, angry, derisive and otherwise critical responses will get lots and lots of coverage and she won't be able to reply to any of them. The message received by many will be "Everyone thinks the PM is crap". At worst it will be "Theresa May is the toady of that terrible foreign power called the EU." It would have been far better to do a broadcast. She is practically self-immolating.
» show previous quotes Saying they would like to change it whilst knowing that is impossible is dishonest.
Rubbish Richard, from inside they would try to change it, it would be difficult but not impossible , that is honest. Different from Tories blatantly lying that they have not sold Scottish fishermen down the Swanee.
Nope. There is absolutely no chance that Scotland would be able to make any significant changes to the CFP from the inside. It is a pipe dream. What you really need is independence from both the UK and the EU.
Cabinet Ministers Hammond, Lidington, Gauke, Rudd and Clarke set to urge May to back permanent UK membership of the Customs Union if she cannot get the Deal through on the first vote so she can then win over Labour support to get a Deal through
Friend of mine got a kicking once for trying to work - nice bunch eh?
40 years or more ago and the memory still lingers as presumably does the belief Corbyn will bring back Union power.
As there are hardly any Union members left any more, I doubt it would mean anything.
My remark slightly in jest but you catch more flies with honey than with flypaper. In any case, Corbyn is playing politics with this and he is a politician so there's no surprise.
He is also trying to be all things to all people which is exactly what May was about between 2016 and the disastrous GE.
She did but she didn't spend the money finding out what was important to ALL people. It certainly wasn't voting in an all powerful Empress in the image of Maggie.
TBH whilst there's vast buckets of blame to go around on all sides, can I just point out that a never ending cycle of ass covering and blame and counter blame isn't going to get the UK out of the vast swamp of cold doodoo we're all standing shoulder deep in.
At some point, Parliament is going to have to stop the blame game, and come to a settled view on where to go next.
There'll be plenty of time for everyone to blame the entire sorry saga on Theresa May when we're firmly out of the woods.
I agree with you but I doubt TM will receive blame from everyone. She has tried to square a circle in the most difficult of circunstances and that will be respected, but of course her opponents will attack her, that is politics
Cabinet Ministers Hammond, Lidington, Gauke, Rudd and Clarke set to urge May to back permanent UK membership of the Customs Union if she cannot get the Deal through on the first vote so she can then win over Labour support to get a Deal through
What is the advantage of the customs union over the customs agreement May has signed? There is none.
I can only imagine you're being wilfully obtuse here.
The thing that will kill May's deal is the backstop. Labour's deal needs no backstop, because it keeps the UK in the customs union permanently.
It's possible that you have failed to understand the true depth of anger in her party and allies at the backstop. She certainly did, and here we are.
Labour proposals would have seen us adopt A backstop, just not THE backstop. That's because CU membership would be part of the FP.
Though, in answer to the original question, no. I don't think Labour could get enough Tory support to get their deal through Parliament. I also think they know that, which is why Labour's policy is a new election first, and *then* their deal.
TBH whilst there's vast buckets of blame to go around on all sides, can I just point out that a never ending cycle of ass covering and blame and counter blame isn't going to get the UK out of the vast swamp of cold doodoo we're all standing shoulder deep in.
At some point, Parliament is going to have to stop the blame game, and come to a settled view on where to go next.
There'll be plenty of time for everyone to blame the entire sorry saga on Theresa May when we're firmly out of the woods.
The time for a plan is BEFORE the vote. We have one with May's deal. Where is Labour's plan? Those are the vast bulk of the people voting it down.
We are the fecking opposition. It isn't our job to ease government proposals through parliament. If May can't keep her own MPs on board that has nothing to do with Labour.
Either blame May for bringing back a crap deal or blame the Tory rebels and their bowler-hatted fellow travellers for not supporting their government. Blaming the opposition is just plain daft.
Actually I don't think those of us that voted to remain and are accepting of the deal are, @Big_G_Northwales
Fair point (as is my position )
In other words, according to two pro-Government apologists, it's all the fault of everyone who disagrees with the Government.
To a degree the two extremes position have created the deadlock not those of us who have been pragmatic
May is a unifier which means she wants everyone in her Conservative tent. I understand it but it's not clever politics as eventually the tent collapses because of the contradictions and contortions involved trying to prop it up.
From June 2016, the Government had two choices - either, seek a "Hard" Brexit which would represent a clear break from the EEC/EU years - the risk was there would be no deal with the EU and we could crash out accordingly but the Government would plan to mitigate the economic disruption resulting (if there were any) and we would genuinely be in control of their laws and out economic destiny once again
The second option was to seek an arrangement closely resembling membership but outside the SM (because there had to be an end to Freedom of Movement). The "Soft" option would recognise continued EU involvement and some EU jurisdiction but had the advantages of being fairly easy to meet and minimising disruption.
After the disastrous 2017 GE, May had no option but to try to do both to keep the maximum number onside so she talked tough at home but was clearly angling for a BINO-style deal. These two contradictory views could be mollified verbally until the colour of the final Deal became clear and then all hell would be let loose as the Deal would end up satisfying no one but her loyalists.
Had she not fatally damaged her own authority, May could have stared down one side or the other and told them what the Deal was going to be and could have used her majority to get it through.
Can’t argue with a word of that. I voted Remain (pretty firmly after some initial wobbling after Cameron’s lamentable ‘renegotiation’) but it was abundantly clear immediately after the vote that the logic of the campaign was inexorably bound to a hard-ish Brexit. But Davis, Johnson and Fox proved themselves pitifully inadequate for the task in hand, while the catastrophic result for the Tories in 2017 ended any room for manoeuvre for Mrs May.
So here we are. For myself, I’d gracelessly and grumpily probably vote for this deal....but if it were voted down I wouldn’t shed many tears. As I said, I voted Remain....and of course the four most unpopular words in the English begin with, “I told......”
Voting for the deal would be the least bad choice from here for the nation. But for the foreseeable future Britain looks set to take a worse choice at every opportunity.
Any crash that happens won't because be Brexit happened. It will be because the deal that makes Brexit works was voted down. Blame for that goes in proportion to the size of the groups voting it down, with Labour Remainers making up the largest chunk.
Nah I think the ERG are probably the guiltiest of the guilty men. And the guiltiest of the them all is Boris Johnson
Ken Clarke is probably looking like the wisest head in parliament at the moment.
Just a shame that, like A Johnson and Portillo, his wisdom didnt mature until after he retired.
Corbyn is responsible for a lot of things, particularly the brick-by-brick demolition of his own party's electability. Brexit however is a train wreck painted blue!
Reading this thread, I see the 'Remain Media' is now also being fingered.
As the government it would be difficult to blame others anyway but I think Labours tactics have left the Conservatives completely without a Labour bogeyman to believably blame.
If you are right labour and Corbyn will rocket up the polls but I am not holding my breath
In fact the polling over the next two weeks is going to be fascinating
Edit: Presumably those annoyed at the Conservatives from a more centrist remainy politics would more likely go Lib Dem.
This may have been true in the past - although it neglects the opportunity cost of being seen to be right in advance rather than opportunistic - and the Lib Dems' woes are not tied to their Brexit stance. But it's a strategy that had a time limit that has now expired and politicians have to face reality rather than their own fantasies.
The Conservatives may get and deserve more of the 'blame' for a bad Brexit - but it is less likely to hit them in the polls. Why? Well, we can look at tuition fees and the Lib Dems. They were arguably least to blame for them being raised. Labour commissioned the review that suggested it. The Tories demanded it be implemented. But it cost the Lib Dems. Why? Because their voters overwhelmingly opposed it. So going along with it with a heavy heart just wasn't good enough.
Now, to Brexit, excepting an apocalyptic no deal (in which case all bets are off, and all leaders/parties, not to mention the country are probably in deep trouble) - the Tories may be 'blamed' for doing something unpleasant and detrimental to us all, but they can at least say they did what their voters wanted. Labour will have gone along with something their voters overwhelmingly (and more so now a people's vote is a policy option the leadership could support) hated. So they're much more vulnerable to voters feeling betrayed and looking elsewhere.
BTW, can anyone explain to me why the professional UK commentariat, who really should know better, tend to credulously believe any statement made by an EU politician as 100% fact?
Is this an exoticism bias? All UK politicians are liars, all EU politicians are honest?
It does seem the media generally are very remain and rarely if ever have a go at the EU
If that were even a quarter true, we wouldn't be in this fine mess.
TBH whilst there's vast buckets of blame to go around on all sides, can I just point out that a never ending cycle of ass covering and blame and counter blame isn't going to get the UK out of the vast swamp of cold doodoo we're all standing shoulder deep in.
At some point, Parliament is going to have to stop the blame game, and come to a settled view on where to go next.
There'll be plenty of time for everyone to blame the entire sorry saga on Theresa May when we're firmly out of the woods.
I agree with you but I doubt TM will receive blame from everyone. She has tried to square a circle in the most difficult of circunstances and that will be respected, but of course her opponents will attack her, that is politics
I mean, somebody will need to be blamed for what happened, and she'll be a very soft target.
Some of the blame may even be slightly unfair, but hey, that's politics.
Cabinet Ministers Hammond, Lidington, Gauke, Rudd and Clarke set to urge May to back permanent UK membership of the Customs Union if she cannot get the Deal through on the first vote so she can then win over Labour support to get a Deal through
What is the advantage of the customs union over the customs agreement May has signed? There is none.
I can only imagine you're being wilfully obtuse here.
The thing that will kill May's deal is the backstop. Labour's deal needs no backstop, because it keeps the UK in the customs union permanently.
It's possible that you have failed to understand the true depth of anger in her party and allies at the backstop. She certainly did, and here we are.
Rubbish. A backstop would be required in all eventualities because the future partnership has yet to be decided upon (and indeed cannot be until we leave).
Getting the UK wide backstop was a coup because if it comes into force it will be just as I ntolerable for the EU (divisibikity of the four frreedoms, no payments etc) as it is for the ERGers.
BTW, can anyone explain to me why the professional UK commentariat, who really should know better, tend to credulously believe any statement made by an EU politician as 100% fact?
Is this an exoticism bias? All UK politicians are liars, all EU politicians are honest?
It does seem the media generally are very remain and rarely if ever have a go at the EU
If that were even a quarter true, we wouldn't be in this fine mess.
Cabinet Ministers Hammond, Lidington, Gauke, Rudd and Clarke set to urge May to back permanent UK membership of the Customs Union if she cannot get the Deal through on the first vote so she can then win over Labour support to get a Deal through
What is the advantage of the customs union over the customs agreement May has signed? There is none.
I can only imagine you're being wilfully obtuse here.
The thing that will kill May's deal is the backstop. Labour's deal needs no backstop, because it keeps the UK in the customs union permanently.
It's possible that you have failed to understand the true depth of anger in her party and allies at the backstop. She certainly did, and here we are.
Rubbish. A backstop would be required in all eventualities because the future partnership has yet to be decided upon (and indeed cannot be until we leave).
Getting the UK wide backstop was a coup because if it comes into force it will be just as I ntolerable for the EU (divisibikity of the four frreedoms, no payments etc) as it is for the ERGers.
A backstop is not necessary, or temporary, or legal, or even morally just. Nor will one ever be acceptable to Parliament.
Barnier thought he was so clever when he conned May into accepting the backstop. I doubt he'll feel so clever when the ENTIRE PROCESS comes crashing down and he realises it's wasted two years of everyone's life.
If the deal fails, the blame (if blame it is) rests with those who voted against. The majority of those will be Labour MPs.
if it results in a No-Deal exit, surely they will accept the blame?
Tory MPs voting against the government, their own party; and the national interest are more to blame. Not that I'm absolving Labour (Or even Uncle Vince) of responsibility, far from it.
Cabinet Ministers Hammond, Lidington, Gauke, Rudd and Clarke set to urge May to back permanent UK membership of the Customs Union if she cannot get the Deal through on the first vote so she can then win over Labour support to get a Deal through
TBH whilst there's vast buckets of blame to go around on all sides, can I just point out that a never ending cycle of ass covering and blame and counter blame isn't going to get the UK out of the vast swamp of cold doodoo we're all standing shoulder deep in.
At some point, Parliament is going to have to stop the blame game, and come to a settled view on where to go next.
There'll be plenty of time for everyone to blame the entire sorry saga on Theresa May when we're firmly out of the woods.
I agree with you but I doubt TM will receive blame from everyone. She has tried to square a circle in the most difficult of circunstances and that will be respected, but of course her opponents will attack her, that is politics
Her opponents as opposed to her what?
The latest "gang of five": Philip Hammond, David Lidington, Amber Rudd, Greg Clark, David Gauke. The ERGers: Sajid Javid, David Gauke (again), Liam Fox, Michael Gove, Brandon Lewis, Chris Grayling, Penny Mordaunt, Andrea Leadsom.
That's the majority of her cabinet. Then there's the DUP. Vociferously supporting her there are...er...
Cabinet Ministers Hammond, Lidington, Gauke, Rudd and Clarke set to urge May to back permanent UK membership of the Customs Union if she cannot get the Deal through on the first vote so she can then win over Labour support to get a Deal through
Cabinet Ministers Hammond, Lidington, Gauke, Rudd and Clarke set to urge May to back permanent UK membership of the Customs Union if she cannot get the Deal through on the first vote so she can then win over Labour support to get a Deal through
What is the advantage of the customs union over the customs agreement May has signed? There is none.
I can only imagine you're being wilfully obtuse here.
The thing that will kill May's deal is the backstop. Labour's deal needs no backstop, because it keeps the UK in the customs union permanently.
It's possible that you have failed to understand the true depth of anger in her party and allies at the backstop. She certainly did, and here we are.
Rubbish. A backstop would be required in all eventualities because the future partnership has yet to be decided upon (and indeed cannot be until we leave).
Getting the UK wide backstop was a coup because if it comes into force it will be just as I ntolerable for the EU (divisibikity of the four frreedoms, no payments etc) as it is for the ERGers.
A backstop is not necessary, or temporary, or legal, or even morally just. Nor will one ever be acceptable to Parliament.
Barnier thought he was so clever when he conned May into accepting the backstop. I doubt he'll feel so clever when the ENTIRE PROCESS comes crashing down and he realises it's wasted two years of everyone's life.
Clearly still not read the WA or understood the process, have we?
TBH whilst there's vast buckets of blame to go around on all sides, can I just point out that a never ending cycle of ass covering and blame and counter blame isn't going to get the UK out of the vast swamp of cold doodoo we're all standing shoulder deep in.
At some point, Parliament is going to have to stop the blame game, and come to a settled view on where to go next.
There'll be plenty of time for everyone to blame the entire sorry saga on Theresa May when we're firmly out of the woods.
I agree with you but I doubt TM will receive blame from everyone. She has tried to square a circle in the most difficult of circunstances and that will be respected, but of course her opponents will attack her, that is politics
Her opponents as opposed to her what?
The latest "gang of five": Philip Hammond, David Lidington, Amber Rudd, Greg Clark, David Gauke. The ERGers: Sajid Javid, David Gauke (again), Liam Fox, Michael Gove, Brandon Lewis, Chris Grayling, Penny Mordaunt, Andrea Leadsom.
That's the majority of her cabinet. Then there's the DUP. Vociferously supporting her there are...er...
So I expect on December 12th we are going to be in interesting times...
Sounds like Corbyn would be open to an arrangement with Theresa May providing she made some commitment to a high integration end state.
I think "a permanent customs union with a UK say" gives the lie to that. He doesn't want his tests to be passable under any circumstances.
There won't be a meaningful say without membership of the EU. That's a given. The question is what Corbyn is prepared to sign up to. This hints he is prepared to sign up or abstain if May commits to Norway+ in my opinion. May will hate that because she's a very partisan politician. But it gives her a potential out.
In the end it may come down to whether May, and the Conservative party more broadly, prefer an undisguised BINO stitch up or a second referendum. I think they'd prefer the latter.
It's a funny "name only" Brexit that returns control over immigration, makes British courts sovereign and reduces membership fees by billions.
You are Rory Stewart and I claim my £5!
Rory Stewart, as a former provincial governor, is one of the few MPs who has actually experienced the realities of power. It is not surprising he is arguing for this deal, given his firm grasp of how things work in practice. Especially when compared to the charlatans and hacks in the Labour Party.
bollox, he is a useless chancer, he may have controlled two camels, a goat and some sand dunes for a few months, but name anything of note the duffer has ever done or said. Numpty extrodinaire.
So I expect on December 12th we are going to be in interesting times...
Sounds like Corbyn would be open to an arrangement with Theresa May providing she made some commitment to a high integration end state.
I think "a permanent customs union with a UK say" gives the lie to that. He doesn't want his tests to be passable under any circumstances.
There won't be a meaningful say without membership of the EU. That's a given. The question is what Corbyn is prepared to sign up to. This hints he is prepared to sign up or abstain if May commits to Norway+ in my opinion. May will hate that because she's a very partisan politician. But it gives her a potential out.
In the end it may come down to whether May, and the Conservative party more broadly, prefer an undisguised BINO stitch up or a second referendum. I think they'd prefer the latter.
It's a funny "name only" Brexit that returns control over immigration, makes British courts sovereign and reduces membership fees by billions.
You are Rory Stewart and I claim my £5!
Rory Stewart, as a former provincial governor, is one of the few MPs who has actually experienced the realities of power. It is not surprising he is arguing for this deal, given his firm grasp of how things work in practice. Especially when compared to the charlatans and hacks in the Labour Party.
bollox, he is a useless chancer, he may have controlled two camels, a goat and some sand dunes for a few months, but name anything of note the duffer has ever done or said. Numpty extrodinaire.
Why am I not surprised to see racism about Middle Easterners on this website?
If the deal fails, the blame (if blame it is) rests with those who voted against. The majority of those will be Labour MPs.
if it results in a No-Deal exit, surely they will accept the blame?
No. The PM had the chance to progress Brexit as a cross-party exercise, and indeed having thrown away her majority was widely urged to do so. But she preferred to make it a Conservative Party project with a little help (now withdrawn) from her friends in the DUP. That the opposition's job is to oppose is already priced into most people's evaluation. The blame will fall to Jacob and his Ergonauts.
Comments
Can someone tell me what it is in this WA that prevents a future Labour government delivering it's "alternative plan for a sensible deal..." (including all the elements he outlines)... assuming they are in power to negotiate the final deal?
Plus, its rhetoric and her repetition of it had the added side-effect of alienating Tory and potential Tory remain voters who might have given her a majority if they felt the government was offering to allay some of their fears about loss of rights, economic problems etc.
Blair has been peripheral to the whole process, while the reason remainers have become more intransigent is the above - there was no attempt to unite the country, only indulge the fantasists in the ERG - who then inevitably turned round and blamed her when those fantasies collided with reality. Remainers have become more determined the more they believe they stand to lose - which is the problem - she and Brexiteers never tried to win people round to a compromise.
Remainer: It's a bad idea.
Brexiteer: Brexit will be fine!
Remainer: It's a bad idea.
Brexiteer: Brexit will be not as bad as war.
Remainer: It's a bad idea.
Brexiteer: Brexit will be not as bad as famine.
Remainer: It's a bad idea.
Brexiteer: Hey, Brexit is really bad!
Remainer: It's a bad idea.
Brexiteer: It's those fucking Remainers' fault...
As the government it would be difficult to blame others anyway but I think Labours tactics have left the Conservatives completely without a Labour bogeyman to believably blame.
So in effect, the only logical reason to hold that position is not liking foreigners coming over here. Now, Jeremy Corbyn is many things, many of them utterly dismal, but he's not a Faragist Little Englander.
If the Deal matched up to the claims in the letter, the opposition to it would be minimal so something is wrong somewhere. You yourself claim there are "good reasons" to oppose it.
All the Deal's supporters seem to have to work with are the consequences of its rejection. Now, the loss of May as Prime Minister doesn't bother me in the least and nor am I taken in by the alarmist prophecies of the "we must have a Deal" brigade. If we have made insufficient preparation for No Deal the Government is accountable for all that follows just as Cameron was for no preparation for a LEAVE vote in 2016.
I'd like the Government and its supporters to be accountable and to show some accountability rather than blame Corbyn, the EU, the "Remainer mafia", the "metropolitan liberal elite" and all the other nonsense but what we get is a blizzard of obfuscation and Project Fear.
To be fair, leaving without a Deal would meet May's main criteria of getting us out of the EU on 29/3/19 while the Deal keeps us effectively in the EU until perhaps 31/12/20 or 31/12/22 or some other date to be determined.
In fact the polling over the next two weeks is going to be fascinating
For decades we were integrated ever closer without the political establishment ever asking the electorate if they agreed, refusing a referendum even when one was explicitly promised in the winning party's manifesto.
Undoubtedly, the current situation is fraught, tempestuous, and not overflowing with political competence. That said, blaming the referendum result rather than decades of unwanted integration may be akin to Aron Ralston blaming his penknife rather than the boulder.
Suppose we'd voted the other way, by the same margin. And more integration occurred. Would we get another referendum then? Very unlikely, in my view. At what point does democratic consent for national powers being frittered away (even against manifesto pledges to the contrary) become an irrelevance?
I still think we may end up with a second referendum. As I wrote in my PB article (http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2018/11/11/brexit-not-the-end-not-the-beginning-of-the-end-perhaps-the-end-of-the-beginning), whatever happens, this is going to rumble on for decades.
If we crash it won't be because the deal was bad. It will be because Remain MPs deliberately blocked it. Take some responsibility.
Edit: Presumably those annoyed at the Conservatives from a more centrist remainy politics would more likely go Lib Dem.
(repeat to fade...)
BTW, can anyone explain to me why the professional UK commentariat, who really should know better, tend to credulously believe any statement made by an EU politician as 100% fact?
Is this an exoticism bias? All UK politicians are liars, all EU politicians are honest?
She'd be unleashing forces she can't control and doesn't understand.
Which, frankly, is normal for her, I guess.
But if Corbyn makes a counter offer of Withdrawal Agreement as is, followed by negotiations for Single Market plus permanent customs union plus EU VAT area, would Tory MPs buy into that? Would Theresa May buy into it?
At some point, Parliament is going to have to stop the blame game, and come to a settled view on where to go next.
There'll be plenty of time for everyone to blame the entire sorry saga on Theresa May when we're firmly out of the woods.
From June 2016, the Government had two choices - either, seek a "Hard" Brexit which would represent a clear break from the EEC/EU years - the risk was there would be no deal with the EU and we could crash out accordingly but the Government would plan to mitigate the economic disruption resulting (if there were any) and we would genuinely be in control of their laws and out economic destiny once again
The second option was to seek an arrangement closely resembling membership but outside the SM (because there had to be an end to Freedom of Movement). The "Soft" option would recognise continued EU involvement and some EU jurisdiction but had the advantages of being fairly easy to meet and minimising disruption.
After the disastrous 2017 GE, May had no option but to try to do both to keep the maximum number onside so she talked tough at home but was clearly angling for a BINO-style deal. These two contradictory views could be mollified verbally until the colour of the final Deal became clear and then all hell would be let loose as the Deal would end up satisfying no one but her loyalists.
Had she not fatally damaged her own authority, May could have stared down one side or the other and told them what the Deal was going to be and could have used her majority to get it through.
Richard_Tyndall said:
» show previous quotes
Saying they would like to change it whilst knowing that is impossible is dishonest.
Rubbish Richard, from inside they would try to change it, it would be difficult but not impossible , that is honest. Different from Tories blatantly lying that they have not sold Scottish fishermen down the Swanee.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/new-gang-of-five-in-second-cabinet-mutiny-on-brexit-gt9l22gxf
I guess thats the PM's plan buggered.
Ken Clarke is probably looking like the wisest head in parliament at the moment.
Parliament may not agree on much, but it certainly looks like it is Parliament's settled will that Theresa May be strongly and stably humiliated in the national interest.
As for what comes after? Everyone is keeping their cards close to their chest. It's going to be ONE HELL of a game of no-limit political hold'em.
Eheu.
The thing that will kill May's deal is the backstop. Labour's deal needs no backstop, because it keeps the UK in the customs union permanently.
It's possible that you have failed to understand the true depth of anger in her party and allies at the backstop. She certainly did, and here we are.
https://twitter.com/ReutersUK/status/1066738336944046081
Either blame May for bringing back a crap deal or blame the Tory rebels and their bowler-hatted fellow travellers for not supporting their government. Blaming the opposition is just plain daft.
https://twitter.com/alexwickham/status/1066732544819961856
So here we are. For myself, I’d gracelessly and grumpily probably vote for this deal....but if it were voted down I wouldn’t shed many tears. As I said, I voted Remain....and of course the four most unpopular words in the English begin with, “I told......”
The Conservatives may get and deserve more of the 'blame' for a bad Brexit - but it is less likely to hit them in the polls. Why? Well, we can look at tuition fees and the Lib Dems. They were arguably least to blame for them being raised. Labour commissioned the review that suggested it. The Tories demanded it be implemented. But it cost the Lib Dems. Why? Because their voters overwhelmingly opposed it. So going along with it with a heavy heart just wasn't good enough.
Now, to Brexit, excepting an apocalyptic no deal (in which case all bets are off, and all leaders/parties, not to mention the country are probably in deep trouble) - the Tories may be 'blamed' for doing something unpleasant and detrimental to us all, but they can at least say they did what their voters wanted. Labour will have gone along with something their voters overwhelmingly (and more so now a people's vote is a policy option the leadership could support) hated. So they're much more vulnerable to voters feeling betrayed and looking elsewhere.
Some of the blame may even be slightly unfair, but hey, that's politics.
Getting the UK wide backstop was a coup because if it comes into force it will be just as I ntolerable for the EU (divisibikity of the four frreedoms, no payments etc) as it is for the ERGers.
if it results in a No-Deal exit, surely they will accept the blame?
Barnier thought he was so clever when he conned May into accepting the backstop. I doubt he'll feel so clever when the ENTIRE PROCESS comes crashing down and he realises it's wasted two years of everyone's life.
The latest "gang of five": Philip Hammond, David Lidington, Amber Rudd, Greg Clark, David Gauke.
The ERGers: Sajid Javid, David Gauke (again), Liam Fox, Michael Gove, Brandon Lewis, Chris Grayling, Penny Mordaunt, Andrea Leadsom.
That's the majority of her cabinet.
Then there's the DUP.
Vociferously supporting her there are...er...
https://twitter.com/robfordmancs/status/1066710345014755328
I WONDER.
Of course, until we call their bluff, we'll not know what the EU's Plan B is.
But PLEEEEEEEEASE, stop asking us to assume politicians are telling the truth. We're not that gullible, and neither are you.