A techie question which I really ought to know the answer to, but I don't. An elderly relative has given me a flash drive on which he has dozens of Word files, some of which he'd be grateful if I could print out. He's asked me to send him a list of the file names so he can recall which ones he wants.
I can print out any individual file. But I find I have no idea how to print a list of all the file names, short of copying them one by one. Can anyone help?
Open up the command line (cmd at the start menu). Go to the relevant directory. Then dir * > listing.txt
to get the contents into listing.txt (filenames with other info)
If you want just .doc files, then something like dir *.doc > listing.txt
edit: And if you want just the filenames and not filesizes: dir *.doc /b > listing.txt
Remainers will mostly rank (remain, deal, no deal) Conservative loyalists will split on 2nd prefs, but just about rank (deal, remain, no deal) Erg will tend to rank (no deal, remain, deal), but there are less than 48 of them so who cares. Other leavers will rank (no deal, deal, remain)
Deal likely to be eliminated in round one, with conservative loyalists just winning it for remain, but it will be close.
Why would Conservative loyalists vote Deal 1, Remain 2.
Yeh, they wouldn't.
Many I know would vote no deal only.
The vast majority wouldn't include Remain at all.
Interesting. The fuck business mentality has penetrated the party more than I thought. I had assumed that old school conservative bank managerial types would care more about economic impact.
Asking business to reorient are is not “fucking business”
They have to operate within the framework laid out by the democratically elected government
Don't recall that it being 'reorientate yourselves' that Boris said to business?
It would be incredibly irresponsible of Remainers backing a referendum to insist on a Referendum being between Remain and no deal (or some undetermined fantasy deal). Basically they would be trying to give the voters a choice between Remain and "Economic catastrophe".
I think voters would react very badly to that, given that there is a Brexit option that does not equal economic catastrophe. Just one that is nobody's first choice.
I am not insisting on anything, just pointing out the absurdity of a sovereign parliament voting down the Deal, then passing a #peoplesvote bill that includes what they have just rejected.
Of course we are in the midst of absurdity, so anything could happen next in Britain's Ratners moment.
So would you favour Parliament voting for WA, "subject to approval in a referendum"?
The biggest risk I see is Kahn deciding that he wants back in the Commons to be on hand when Corbyn calls it a day. He will have spent the previous 4 years doing something a lot more meaningful than sulking on the back benches like many of his potential opponents and we should always remember how high a proportion of Labour members and activists live in London.
There is almost zero chance of the Tories beating him if he does run.
He’s not actually done anything meaningful while in office though
That's a good bet. Bailey has no chance. On a personal level I've decided I'm not going to campaign for him. I'm not even sure if I'll vote for him at this stage.
Mr. S, depends. One question, three answers, and you're right.
But if it's a two-phase referendum it'd be perhaps fairer, although that might introduce a bias to the middle.
Q1 Should the UK Remain or Leave?
Q2 If Leave wins, should the UK leave with May's deal, or with no deal?
Phase referendum is not fairer. It is fairer to word it according to the possible outcomes. There are three. We need to pick one.
On April we will
Remain Leave with Mays deal Leave without Mays deal.
That’s it. Pick one. Or rank them
How is that honouring a vote where 52% have already said "Leave"? Or the 2017 General Election manifestos where 86% of the votes were cast for parties pledging to implement Brexit? Go ahead - if you really want to try to break democracy in this country...
Agree - no binary vote can have Remain as an option - that’s been asked and answered.
Given the closeness of the first vote there is a case for including Remain as one of three options.
If Parliament can’t do it’s job of implementing what people voted for in both a referendum and a General Election they’d better be pretty confident in proposing a second referendum or they’ll likely face mass redundancies at the first available opportunity.
I strongly doubt that. What choice have the voters got? Unless UKIP or a successor anti-establishment Party appears and wins 30%+ of the vote, that can't really happen. FPTP entrenches the existing parties too well.
Mr. Charles, that was my view too. People seemed upset that she was so successful. Bloody woman, paying huge amounts in tax and providing jobs for people.
You might not believe this, but it is possible to do that without having to pay yourself £217 million.
Personally, I have no problem with her salary. Bookies make profits and whether these go to shareholders or as salary bothers me very little.
I have accounts with 5 bookies, but I think Bet365 is one of the best, not least because it doesn't run shops full of FOBTs.
Maybe I'm a hopeless dreamer, but I don't see it as a choice between shareholder dividend, or CEO bonus. Perhaps they could put it into charity?
Either way this is about picking a path from the three alternatives for April 2019. Parliament would have failed. So it’s back to the people who have a right to choose from all three possibilities.
Or if Parliament has failed pick a new Parliament.
That’s the Labour line, but as Starmer said May has run down the clock deliberately taking alternatives off the table. So we’re left with a vote.
A General Election can be run a lot sooner than a referendum unless you want to leave the result open to endless challenge by driving a coach & horses through Electoral Commission guidelines.
A general election isn't asking a relevant question to resolving brexit.
And a general election leaves no deal in place by default. The time for a GE makes no deal almost certain
The Feb '74 election wasn't called until the beginning of the month. I realise the FTPA complicates the position. but the HoC voted on 19th April. for an election on June 8th. I suspect that if it hadn't been for the locals that time could have been reduced, although the two public holidays obviously extended things a bit.
How about an election to decide if we should have a referendum? I think a GE first is more legitimate, as with Harold Wilson promising an exceptional referendum if he won the Oct. 1974 election ... which he did.
The internet says that according to an 1983 Act, GEs take min. 17 working days, say from Tue. 5 Feb. to Thur. 28 Feb. 2019.
But it appears that a referendum would take a f*** of a lot longer and that might bring us up against, er, the EU Parliament elections
So Farage would probably stand again in the hope of more gravy from Brussels ... ahem, honourable employment as a representative of his constituents. Meanwhile though they'd show the idiots who think the EU is less democratic than Whitehall the workings of democracy and that the EU uses a fairer voting system called PR.
The EU would no doubt agree to suspend talks while democracy takes its course. But it might not be very amused at the clash of these two events.
A techie question which I really ought to know the answer to, but I don't. An elderly relative has given me a flash drive on which he has dozens of Word files, some of which he'd be grateful if I could print out. He's asked me to send him a list of the file names so he can recall which ones he wants.
I can print out any individual file. But I find I have no idea how to print a list of all the file names, short of copying them one by one. Can anyone help?
In Linux or a Unix system it'd be easier. On Windows, I'd try opening File Explorer, sorting by file type (so Word files are on the top), and doing Print Screen. Then paste into Paint, cut that image down to just the files, and you've got a list of the files. It's an image rather than a load of text, but the information is there and readily readable. You may have to do it a few times if the list is very long, but you'll get 20-30+ names each time you screenshot and paste.
Mr. Charles, that was my view too. People seemed upset that she was so successful. Bloody woman, paying huge amounts in tax and providing jobs for people.
You might not believe this, but it is possible to do that without having to pay yourself £217 million.
Personally, I have no problem with her salary. Bookies make profits and whether these go to shareholders or as salary bothers me very little.
I have accounts with 5 bookies, but I think Bet365 is one of the best, not least because it doesn't run shops full of FOBTs.
Maybe I'm a hopeless dreamer, but I don't see it as a choice between shareholder dividend, or CEO bonus. Perhaps they could put it into charity?
I don't think bookies have ever been charities, indeed they specialise in taking money off the poor and addicted!
Either way this is about picking a path from the three alternatives for April 2019. Parliament would have failed. So it’s back to the people who have a right to choose from all three possibilities.
There aren’t 3 paths
Think of it as a journey
We came to a fork in the road marked Remain and Leave
We chose the Leave path
Now we have come to a fork marked Deal or No Deal (we must be in Kent)
So we can choose one of those
You don’t get to scamper back up the road because you really want to ignore the fact that a majority of those who voted in the referendum voted to leave
That’s like the guy who invents a “house rule” in the middle of a card game that strangely always benefits the proposer
The parliamentary decision that gave effect to the referendum was the one to invoke Article 50. Now at the end of the Article 50 process we come to a new fork in the road with three alternatives. It's a denial of reality to suggest anything else is the case.
You can't have remain as an option on a referendum without first asking the EU if we can remain and if so on what terms.
May isn't going to do this as it would lose the Tories massive amounts of support from their leave voters. Also she doesn't want to show that it is still possible to remain as that would lose what little support she has for the deal.
So how can referendum with remain as an option happen?
There be no referendum with “No Deal” as an option. No one but a small and mad minority in Parliament actually wants that. It is like putting a loaded gun into the electorate’s hands.
After the first vote is lost:
May will promise to rethink before bringing an amended version for voting on.
The ERGers will have another go at deposing May. Can they reach 48 letters after May is defeated on her only policy?
Labour will seek a VONC, which can only pass if the DUP want it to. Will the DUP bring down the government or hold out for a change in Tory party leadership?
The most likely scenario still seems to me that May will find some form of words to allow the DUP and some ERGers to climb down, although I must admit the reports around the suppressed legal advice makes this less likely than it was.
There are fascinating what-ifs.
What if Boris promised EFTA for now and then a referendum?
All depends on May.
She either needs to get her party (and the DUP) on board; OR she needs to find a cross-party majority even in the face of large sections of her own party; OR she needs to throw it to the public via a general election.
And she needs to find one of these solutions before someone else (Corbyn, Gove, Johnson) does.
Mr. Charles, that was my view too. People seemed upset that she was so successful. Bloody woman, paying huge amounts in tax and providing jobs for people.
You might not believe this, but it is possible to do that without having to pay yourself £217 million.
Personally, I have no problem with her salary. Bookies make profits and whether these go to shareholders or as salary bothers me very little.
I have accounts with 5 bookies, but I think Bet365 is one of the best, not least because it doesn't run shops full of FOBTs.
It would be nice if the government stopped allowing these companies to base themselves in Gibraltar to avoid UK taxes.
You can't have remain as an option on a referendum without first asking the EU if we can remain and if so on what terms.
May isn't going to do this as it would lose the Tories massive amounts of support from their leave voters. Also she doesn't want to show that it is still possible to remain as that would lose what little support she has for the deal.
So how can referendum with remain as an option happen?
Well we had one referendum without asking the EU if we could leave...
Remainers will mostly rank (remain, deal, no deal) Conservative loyalists will split on 2nd prefs, but just about rank (deal, remain, no deal) Erg will tend to rank (no deal, remain, deal), but there are less than 48 of them so who cares. Other leavers will rank (no deal, deal, remain)
Deal likely to be eliminated in round one, with conservative loyalists just winning it for remain, but it will be close.
Why would Conservative loyalists vote Deal 1, Remain 2.
Yeh, they wouldn't.
Many I know would vote no deal only.
The vast majority wouldn't include Remain at all.
Interesting. The fuck business mentality has penetrated the party more than I thought. I had assumed that old school conservative bank managerial types would care more about economic impact.
Asking business to reorient are is not “fucking business”
They have to operate within the framework laid out by the democratically elected government
Asking business to reorient is a euphemism for "fuck business", no?
Any sensible business is reorienting to the rest of the EU right now. Even Rees-Mogg is doing it. This is not necessarily to our advantage in the UK.
There be no referendum with “No Deal” as an option. No one but a small and mad minority in Parliament actually wants that. It is like putting a loaded gun into the electorate’s hands.
After the first vote is lost:
May will promise to rethink before bringing an amended version for voting on.
The ERGers will have another go at deposing May. Can they reach 48 letters after May is defeated on her only policy?
Labour will seek a VONC, which can only pass if the DUP want it to. Will the DUP bring down the government or hold out for a change in Tory party leadership?
The most likely scenario still seems to me that May will find some form of words to allow the DUP and some ERGers to climb down, although I must admit the reports around the suppressed legal advice makes this less likely than it was.
There are fascinating what-ifs.
What if Boris promised EFTA for now and then a referendum?
All depends on May.
She either needs to get her party (and the DUP) on board; OR she needs to find a cross-party majority even in the face of large sections of her own party; OR she needs to throw it to the public via a general election.
And she needs to find one of these solutions before someone else (Corbyn, Gove, Johnson) does.
The fact that no deal would be a "loaded gun" option doesn't mean it doesn't happen. There are a lot of Remain MPs who think that the best/most likely way to win a further referendum for Remain is to make it between Remain and the loaded gun.
Khan wins if Khan stands. The doubt (and it's a big one) lies in whether he takes the opportunity to re-enter Parliament in the meantime.
I don't see how the timing works out for him this side of the next Mayoral election. If there is a GE before 2020 it will be called with short notice, which probably means he doesn't have time to find a vacant, winnable seat in London - unless there's a Khan loyalist keeping a seat warm for him.
More likely for him if he does want to return to the Commons is that he wins another term as Mayor in 2020 and then finds a seat for the GE in 2022 - assuming that the Tories are so fearful of the electorate that they take this Parliament the distance and are not forced to go to the voters early.
Must include No Deal because otherwise a big chunk of leave opinion is disenfranchised. Cannot include No Deal because it is ill defined.
Must include The Deal because that is what is on offer. Cannot include The Deal because it does not agree the future relationship.
Must include Remain because, well it must. Cannot include Remain because the 2016 referendum has ruled it out.
Not happening. If it does I will eat my favourite socks.
(Gove on Marr. Another virtuoso performance. League of his own. If the tories go for anyone else as next leader they are IMO nuts. So no doubt they will.)
LOL! Northern Ireland well and truly shafted by the stupid restrictions on the draw for the Euro 2020 qualifiers.
Don't tell Arlene.
Wasn't there some clause preventing countries being paired with those they had political disagreements with? How did we find enough teams to be in England's group?
Mr. S, depends. One question, three answers, and you're right.
But if it's a two-phase referendum it'd be perhaps fairer, although that might introduce a bias to the middle.
Q1 Should the UK Remain or Leave?
Q2 If Leave wins, should the UK leave with May's deal, or with no deal?
Phase referendum is not fairer. It is fairer to word it according to the possible outcomes. There are three. We need to pick one.
On April we will
Remain Leave with Mays deal Leave without Mays deal.
That’s it. Pick one. Or rank them
In the Monty Hall challenge once you reject a choice it’s gone
Remain has been rejected
They shouldn’t get a second attempt
I understand why leavers are absolutely desperate to prevent the public having any further say in Brexit but that doesn't make it right.
I think leavers will be making a very major error if they manoeuvre the UK out of the EU without a deal and without ensuring that that is what the country actually now wants.
The prospect of leaving without a deal was dismissed as "Project Fear" by the leave campaigns IIRC so I really do not see how you could possibly go down that route without further reference to the voters.
(Gove on Marr. Another virtuoso performance. League of his own. If the tories go for anyone else as next leader they are IMO nuts. So no doubt they will.)
Do you really believe he thinks we have the EU "over a barrel" with this deal?
The biggest risk I see is Kahn deciding that he wants back in the Commons to be on hand when Corbyn calls it a day. He will have spent the previous 4 years doing something a lot more meaningful than sulking on the back benches like many of his potential opponents and we should always remember how high a proportion of Labour members and activists live in London.
There is almost zero chance of the Tories beating him if he does run.
He’s not actually done anything meaningful while in office though
I thought he had managed to screw up TFL. Sound Labour credentials that.
Mr. Charles, that was my view too. People seemed upset that she was so successful. Bloody woman, paying huge amounts in tax and providing jobs for people.
You might not believe this, but it is possible to do that without having to pay yourself £217 million.
Personally, I have no problem with her salary. Bookies make profits and whether these go to shareholders or as salary bothers me very little.
I have accounts with 5 bookies, but I think Bet365 is one of the best, not least because it doesn't run shops full of FOBTs.
Maybe I'm a hopeless dreamer, but I don't see it as a choice between shareholder dividend, or CEO bonus. Perhaps they could put it into charity?
I don't think bookies have ever been charities, indeed they specialise in taking money off the poor and addicted!
But what was the original point about Pricewise about ?
King Cole, she could probably afford it. But in this day and age some leftwing trustafarians would likely roll up to set fire to it as a bastion of privilege. She already gets shit for being successful and paying huge amounts in tax.
[I do like the idea behind Saltaire. As an aside, some are worried it's going to be screwed up (it's a heritage site) by more transport infrastructure].
LOL! Northern Ireland well and truly shafted by the stupid restrictions on the draw for the Euro 2020 qualifiers.
Don't tell Arlene.
Wasn't there some clause preventing countries being paired with those they had political disagreements with? How did we find enough teams to be in England's group?
I don't think we're arguing with Montenegro, are we?
Khan wins if Khan stands. The doubt (and it's a big one) lies in whether he takes the opportunity to re-enter Parliament in the meantime.
I don't see how the timing works out for him this side of the next Mayoral election. If there is a GE before 2020 it will be called with short notice, which probably means he doesn't have time to find a vacant, winnable seat in London - unless there's a Khan loyalist keeping a seat warm for him.
More likely for him if he does want to return to the Commons is that he wins another term as Mayor in 2020 and then finds a seat for the GE in 2022 - assuming that the Tories are so fearful of the electorate that they take this Parliament the distance and are not forced to go to the voters early.
My thoughts are in the header, the short version is that he is 46 going on 40 and has plenty of time on his side for a return to parliament.
King Cole, she could probably afford it. But in this day and age some leftwing trustafarians would likely roll up to set fire to it as a bastion of privilege. She already gets shit for being successful and paying huge amounts in tax.
[I do like the idea behind Saltaire. As an aside, some are worried it's going to be screwed up (it's a heritage site) by more transport infrastructure].
I don't think there's a pub there though. Old Titus was dead against the Demon Drink.
The wife of a friend was born there. Says it was quite a good place to live, all things considered.
Must include No Deal because otherwise a big chunk of leave opinion is disenfranchised. Cannot include No Deal because it is ill defined.
Must include The Deal because that is what is on offer. Cannot include The Deal because it does not agree the future relationship.
Must include Remain because, well it must. Cannot include Remain because the 2016 referendum has ruled it out.
Not happening. If it does I will eat my favourite socks.
(Gove on Marr. Another virtuoso performance. League of his own. If the tories go for anyone else as next leader they are IMO nuts. So no doubt they will.)
There is no majority in Parliament for the deal There is no way to trigger a new referendum, even if there were time, unless the Govt do it. There is no easy route for a new Govt There isn’t a 2/3rds majority for a GE
We came to a fork in the road marked Remain and Leave
We chose the Leave path
Now we have come to a fork marked Deal or No Deal (we must be in Kent)
So we can choose one of those
You don’t get to scamper back up the road because you really want to ignore the fact that a majority of those who voted in the referendum voted to leave
That’s like the guy who invents a “house rule” in the middle of a card game that strangely always benefits the proposer
If the path you chose leads only to a cliff edge you absolutely back up and try again.
Congratulations. One of the best anti-Brexit analogies yet
Either way this is about picking a path from the three alternatives for April 2019. Parliament would have failed. So it’s back to the people who have a right to choose from all three possibilities.
Isn't it two choices as things stand?
There are three, remain, deal and no deal, which is the default. That’s it. Essentially one of those will happen in just four months time.
It will reduce to one or two next Tuesday. One if the Deal passes, Two if it does not (A50 withdrawal* vs No Deal).
*A50 withdrawal is not quite synonymous with Remain, though in practice is likely to be.
No it will not.
If as we expect deal falls it will still have been backed by 200 plus mps with the combined no deal/remain 400 plus. You may want to dish the deal but as Gina Miller said today it has to be all three to be fair to everyone. And I thought she was a heroine of yours
If the Deal has been voted down by MPs, then why would they ask for it to be included in a #peoplesvote?
The Deal would be dead if voted down, though as I have predicted before the Tory backbenchers are likely to funk bringing down their own government.
By that logic Remain - which has been voted down by the people - shouldn’t be included either
Either way this is about picking a path from the three alternatives for April 2019. Parliament would have failed. So it’s back to the people who have a right to choose from all three possibilities.
Isn't it two choices as things stand?
There are three, remain, deal and no deal, which is the default. That’s it. Essentially one of those will happen in just four months time.
It will reduce to one or two next Tuesday. One if the Deal passes, Two if it does not (A50 withdrawal* vs No Deal).
*A50 withdrawal is not quite synonymous with Remain, though in practice is likely to be.
No it will not.
If as we expect deal falls it will still have been backed by 200 plus mps with the combined no deal/remain 400 plus. You may want to dish the deal but as Gina Miller said today it has to be all three to be fair to everyone. And I thought she was a heroine of yours
If the Deal has been voted down by MPs, then why would they ask for it to be included in a #peoplesvote?
The Deal would be dead if voted down, though as I have predicted before the Tory backbenchers are likely to funk bringing down their own government.
By that logic Remain - which has been voted down by the people - shouldn’t be included either
On Foxy’s second point, yes, there will be no VONC. But there will be a new leader.
Either way this is about picking a path from the three alternatives for April 2019. Parliament would have failed. So it’s back to the people who have a right to choose from all three possibilities.
There aren’t 3 paths
Think of it as a journey
We came to a fork in the road marked Remain and Leave
We chose the Leave path
Now we have come to a fork marked Deal or No Deal (we must be in Kent)
So we can choose one of those
You don’t get to scamper back up the road because you really want to ignore the fact that a majority of those who voted in the referendum voted to leave
That’s like the guy who invents a “house rule” in the middle of a card game that strangely always benefits the proposer
In every journey I've ever been on, I've had the right to turn around and take the other fork if I've been getting lost or if the road gets worse. And the three point turn is still taught in the driving test, I believe. The "must press on, cannot ever turn around even if the majority now want to" rule smacks more of being a made-up house rule.
King Cole, no pub, but I think I read somewhere he wasn't that against drink he just didn't want his workers grogged up.
King Cole (2), aye, covered in Vanished Kingdoms by Norman Davies. Montenegro was on our side but the deposition of the Tsar, who likely would've stood up for them, meant they got swallowed up by Serbia.
There be no referendum with “No Deal” as an option. No one but a small and mad minority in Parliament actually wants that. It is like putting a loaded gun into the electorate’s hands.
After the first vote is lost:
May will promise to rethink before bringing an amended version for voting on.
The ERGers will have another go at deposing May. Can they reach 48 letters after May is defeated on her only policy?
Labour will seek a VONC, which can only pass if the DUP want it to. Will the DUP bring down the government or hold out for a change in Tory party leadership?
The most likely scenario still seems to me that May will find some form of words to allow the DUP and some ERGers to climb down, although I must admit the reports around the suppressed legal advice makes this less likely than it was.
There are fascinating what-ifs.
What if Boris promised EFTA for now and then a referendum?
All depends on May.
She either needs to get her party (and the DUP) on board; OR she needs to find a cross-party majority even in the face of large sections of her own party; OR she needs to throw it to the public via a general election.
And she needs to find one of these solutions before someone else (Corbyn, Gove, Johnson) does.
" No one but a small and mad minority in Parliament actually wants that."
Its not my first choice but to say no one wants it is clearly ludicrous. Currently polling shows it is the preferred choice of some 30% of the population in a three way choice and 45% in a 2 way with Remain.
The biggest risk I see is Kahn deciding that he wants back in the Commons to be on hand when Corbyn calls it a day. He will have spent the previous 4 years doing something a lot more meaningful than sulking on the back benches like many of his potential opponents and we should always remember how high a proportion of Labour members and activists live in London.
There is almost zero chance of the Tories beating him if he does run.
He’s not actually done anything meaningful while in office though
Is that necessarily a bad thing. Isn't just managing the city competently with small scale adjustments and letting people get on with their lives a good thing?
I am not personally a Kahn fan but the idea that every Mayor (or PM) needs to be fronting revolution of some kind or another is very tiring.
A techie question which I really ought to know the answer to, but I don't. An elderly relative has given me a flash drive on which he has dozens of Word files, some of which he'd be grateful if I could print out. He's asked me to send him a list of the file names so he can recall which ones he wants.
I can print out any individual file. But I find I have no idea how to print a list of all the file names, short of copying them one by one. Can anyone help?
Open up the command line (cmd at the start menu). Go to the relevant directory. Then dir * > listing.txt
to get the contents into listing.txt (filenames with other info)
If you want just .doc files, then something like dir *.doc > listing.txt
edit: And if you want just the filenames and not filesizes: dir *.doc /b > listing.txt
Wonderful, thank you.
I hope it works.
I've probably done my geek cred no good by admitting I use the Windows command line. But sometimes it's so darned useful ...
Either way this is about picking a path from the three alternatives for April 2019. Parliament would have failed. So it’s back to the people who have a right to choose from all three possibilities.
There aren’t 3 paths
Think of it as a journey
We came to a fork in the road marked Remain and Leave
We chose the Leave path
Now we have come to a fork marked Deal or No Deal (we must be in Kent)
So we can choose one of those
You don’t get to scamper back up the road because you really want to ignore the fact that a majority of those who voted in the referendum voted to leave
That’s like the guy who invents a “house rule” in the middle of a card game that strangely always benefits the proposer
In every journey I've ever been on, I've had the right to turn around and take the other fork if I've been getting lost or if the road gets worse. And the three point turn is still taught in the driving test, I believe. The "must press on, cannot ever turn around even if the majority now want to" rule smacks more of being a made-up house rule.
But right now you're in the boot, Arlene has the wheel and Mogg is in the passenger seat.
There be no referendum with “No Deal” as an option. No one but a small and mad minority in Parliament actually wants that. It is like putting a loadeomd gun into the electorate’s hands.
After the first vote is lost:
May will promise to rethink before bringing an amended version for voting on.
The ERGers will have another go at deposing May. Can they reach 48 letters after May is defeated on her only policy?
Labour will seek a VONC, which can only pass if the DUP want it to. Will the DUP bring down the government or hold out for a change in Tory party leadership?
The most likely scenario still seems to me that May will find some form of words to allow the DUP and some ERGers to climb down, although I must admit the reports around the suppressed legal advice makes this less likely than it was.
There are fascinating what-ifs.
What if Boris promised EFTA for now and then a referendum?
All depends on May.
She either needs to get her party (and the DUP) on board; OR she needs to find a cross-party majority even in the face of large sections of her own party; OR she needs to throw it to the public via a general election.
And she needs to find one of these solutions before someone else (Corbyn, Gove, Johnson) does.
" No one but a small and mad minority in Parliament actually wants that."
Its not my first choice but to say no one wants it is clearly ludicrous. Currently polling shows it is the preferred choice of some 30% of the population in a three way choice and 45% in a 2 way with Remain.
(Gove on Marr. Another virtuoso performance. League of his own. If the tories go for anyone else as next leader they are IMO nuts. So no doubt they will.)
Do you really believe he thinks we have the EU "over a barrel" with this deal?
No. But the point about mutual discomfort was well made.
One of the most potent arguments for a second referendum is that we didn't know what we were voting for and now we have a concrete proposal on the table. Unfortunately, the argument is rubbish.
If we have remain as an option in #Brexit2: vote harder what does it mean? Firstly, it is not in our gift. The Greeks voted for all sorts of things in their negotiations with the EU. It made no difference whatsoever because the EU were not bound by their votes. This wasn't destroying democracy as some claimed at the time, it was simple recognition of the fact that a demos does not have the right, short of conquest, to decide things for anyone else.
So, if we assume that the CJEU decide we cannot rescind Article 50, what are the conditions that the EU would impose on consent? The rebate? The cost of the negotiations? One of our other opt outs? An undertaking that we won't try again for, say, 20 years? What if they just say no, enough?
One of the consequences of leaving is that the European Medicines Agency is moving to Amsterdam, even if their staff seem reluctant to shift. Do we get it back? The ECB operations in London are being wound down. Do we get them back? If we don't get our share of goodies from the EU is paying even more of a subscription for less a good deal? How much will our net contribution go up by?
Very similar criticisms can be made of the other possible options. May's deal is a WA, not a final deal at all. What will that final deal look like? Do we really have any better idea than we did at the time of the referendum? It depends on so many factors, not least who will be in power in the UK and negotiating it.
Does no deal really mean no deal at all? Or does it mean mini deals? If so, which ones, agreed by who, when, how?
At the end of the day the decision in #Brexit1 was a question of principle. No one really has the right to say that Brexit must include A or B or exclude X or Y. This Parliament was overwhelmingly elected on manifestos committed to implementing the vote. Disregarding that vote now because it lacked specification when no such precision is available is disingenuous and dishonest.
There is no way to trigger a new referendum, even if there were time, unless the Govt do it. [/quote]
My most likely outcome now. The EU will allow a few mths extension for it.
[quote] There isn’t a 2/3rds majority for a GE
What if, after losing meaningful vote on 11th, May promises Corbyn a GE in return for abstaining on MV2?
Not in the gift of the leader now. FTPA innit.
Tory MPs won’t vote for a new election until Brexit is completed, and probably for a long while after.
So you are predicting the 48 letters will be found, and a new leader elected to oversee No Deal?
Not what I was thinking. FTPA needs 2/3rds majority in the HoC for an election. Tory MPs won’t vote for one if promised by the leader in some ridiculous pact with Corbz.
Either way this is about picking a path from the three alternatives for April 2019. Parliament would have failed. So it’s back to the people who have a right to choose from all three possibilities.
Isn't it two choices as things stand?
There are three, remain, deal and no deal, which is the default. That’s it. Essentially one of those will happen in just four months time.
It will reduce to one or two next Tuesday. One if the Deal passes, Two if it does not (A50 withdrawal* vs No Deal).
*A50 withdrawal is not quite synonymous with Remain, though in practice is likely to be.
No it will not.
If as we expect deal falls it will still have been backed by 200 plus mps with the combined no deal/remain 400 plus. You may want to dish the deal but as Gina Miller said today it has to be all three to be fair to everyone. And I thought she was a heroine of yours
If the Deal has been voted down by MPs, then why would they ask for it to be included in a #peoplesvote?
The Deal would be dead if voted down, though as I have predicted before the Tory backbenchers are likely to funk bringing down their own government.
By that logic Remain - which has been voted down by the people - shouldn’t be included either
The biggest risk I see is Kahn deciding that he wants back in the Commons to be on hand when Corbyn calls it a day. He will have spent the previous 4 years doing something a lot more meaningful than sulking on the back benches like many of his potential opponents and we should always remember how high a proportion of Labour members and activists live in London.
There is almost zero chance of the Tories beating him if he does run.
He’s not actually done anything meaningful while in office though
Is that necessarily a bad thing. Isn't just managing the city competently with small scale adjustments and letting people get on with their lives a good thing?
I am not personally a Kahn fan but the idea that every Mayor (or PM) needs to be fronting revolution of some kind or another is very tiring.
Unusually, I’m with Charles. Sadiq is an empty suit and his response to issues around crime, housing and transport has been pathetic.
A techie question which I really ought to know the answer to, but I don't. An elderly relative has given me a flash drive on which he has dozens of Word files, some of which he'd be grateful if I could print out. He's asked me to send him a list of the file names so he can recall which ones he wants.
I can print out any individual file. But I find I have no idea how to print a list of all the file names, short of copying them one by one. Can anyone help?
Open up the command line (cmd at the start menu). Go to the relevant directory. Then dir * > listing.txt
to get the contents into listing.txt (filenames with other info)
If you want just .doc files, then something like dir *.doc > listing.txt
edit: And if you want just the filenames and not filesizes: dir *.doc /b > listing.txt
A further tip is to browse to the folder in File Explorer and then select "open command prompt" from Explorers file menu. That way you start in right folder.
Behind every copy of Windows a bit of MS-DOS lingers on.
Either way this is about picking a path from the three alternatives for April 2019. Parliament would have failed. So it’s back to the people who have a right to choose from all three possibilities.
There aren’t 3 paths
Think of it as a journey
We came to a fork in the road marked Remain and Leave
We chose the Leave path
Now we have come to a fork marked Deal or No Deal (we must be in Kent)
So we can choose one of those
You don’t get to scamper back up the road because you really want to ignore the fact that a majority of those who voted in the referendum voted to leave
That’s like the guy who invents a “house rule” in the middle of a card game that strangely always benefits the proposer
In every journey I've ever been on, I've had the right to turn around and take the other fork if I've been getting lost or if the road gets worse. And the three point turn is still taught in the driving test, I believe. The "must press on, cannot ever turn around even if the majority now want to" rule smacks more of being a made-up house rule.
If we voted remain we would never get the chance to change our minds if the majority regretted our decision 2 years later. That would be it.
This argument is purely trotted about by people who want to remain and will do or say anything to get it to happen.
One of the most potent arguments for a second referendum is that we didn't know what we were voting for and now we have a concrete proposal on the table. Unfortunately, the argument is rubbish.
If we have remain as an option in #Brexit2: vote harder what does it mean? Firstly, it is not in our gift. The Greeks voted for all sorts of things in their negotiations with the EU. It made no difference whatsoever because the EU were not bound by their votes. This wasn't destroying democracy as some claimed at the time, it was simple recognition of the fact that a demos does not have the right, short of conquest, to decide things for anyone else.
So, if we assume that the CJEU decide we cannot rescind Article 50, what are the conditions that the EU would impose on consent? The rebate? The cost of the negotiations? One of our other opt outs? An undertaking that we won't try again for, say, 20 years? What if they just say no, enough?
One of the consequences of leaving is that the European Medicines Agency is moving to Amsterdam, even if their staff seem reluctant to shift. Do we get it back? The ECB operations in London are being wound down. Do we get them back? If we don't get our share of goodies from the EU is paying even more of a subscription for less a good deal? How much will our net contribution go up by?
Very similar criticisms can be made of the other possible options. May's deal is a WA, not a final deal at all. What will that final deal look like? Do we really have any better idea than we did at the time of the referendum? It depends on so many factors, not least who will be in power in the UK and negotiating it.
Does no deal really mean no deal at all? Or does it mean mini deals? If so, which ones, agreed by who, when, how?
At the end of the day the decision in #Brexit1 was a question of principle. No one really has the right to say that Brexit must include A or B or exclude X or Y. This Parliament was overwhelmingly elected on manifestos committed to implementing the vote. Disregarding that vote now because it lacked specification when no such precision is available is disingenuous and dishonest.
Either way this is about picking a path from the three alternatives for April 2019. Parliament would have failed. So it’s back to the people who have a right to choose from all three possibilities.
There aren’t 3 paths
Think of it as a journey
We came to a fork in the road marked Remain and Leave
We chose the Leave path
Now we have come to a fork marked Deal or No Deal (we must be in Kent)
So we can choose one of those
You don’t get to scamper back up the road because you really want to ignore the fact that a majority of those who voted in the referendum voted to leave
That’s like the guy who invents a “house rule” in the middle of a card game that strangely always benefits the proposer
In every journey I've ever been on, I've had the right to turn around and take the other fork if I've been getting lost or if the road gets worse. And the three point turn is still taught in the driving test, I believe. The "must press on, cannot ever turn around even if the majority now want to" rule smacks more of being a made-up house rule.
If we voted remain we would never get the chance to change our minds if the majority regretted our decision 2 years later. That would be it.
This argument is purely trotted about by people who want to remain and will do or say anything to get it to happen.
By the way, my ideal result is Deal followed by EEA/EFTA after the transition period. That might not fit too well with your core assumptions and worldview, though.
Either way this is about picking a path from the three alternatives for April 2019. Parliament would have failed. So it’s back to the people who have a right to choose from all three possibilities.
Isn't it two choices as things stand?
There are three, remain, deal and no deal, which is the default. That’s it. Essentially one of those will happen in just four months time.
It will reduce to one or two next Tuesday. One if the Deal passes, Two if it does not (A50 withdrawal* vs No Deal).
*A50 withdrawal is not quite synonymous with Remain, though in practice is likely to be.
No it will not.
If as we expect deal falls it will still have been backed by 200 plus mps with the combined no deal/remain 400 plus. You may want to dish the deal but as Gina Miller said today it has to be all three to be fair to everyone. And I thought she was a heroine of yours
If the Deal has been voted down by MPs, then why would they ask for it to be included in a #peoplesvote?
The Deal would be dead if voted down, though as I have predicted before the Tory backbenchers are likely to funk bringing down their own government.
By that logic Remain - which has been voted down by the people - shouldn’t be included either
On Foxy’s second point, yes, there will be no VONC. But there will be a new leader.
Re new leader. Please explain to me the process, time involved, and how that benefits brexit
Either way this is about picking a path from the three alternatives for April 2019. Parliament would have failed. So it’s back to the people who have a right to choose from all three possibilities.
Isn't it two choices as things stand?
There are three, remain, deal and no deal, which is the default. That’s it. Essentially one of those will happen in just four months time.
It will reduce to one or two next Tuesday. One if the Deal passes, Two if it does not (A50 withdrawal* vs No Deal).
*A50 withdrawal is not quite synonymous with Remain, though in practice is likely to be.
No it will not.
If as we expect deal falls it will still have been backed by 200 plus mps with the combined no deal/remain 400 plus. You may want to dish the deal but as Gina Miller said today it has to be all three to be fair to everyone. And I thought she was a heroine of yours
If the Deal has been voted down by MPs, then why would they ask for it to be included in a #peoplesvote?
The Deal would be dead if voted down, though as I have predicted before the Tory backbenchers are likely to funk bringing down their own government.
By that logic Remain - which has been voted down by the people - shouldn’t be included either
On Foxy’s second point, yes, there will be no VONC. But there will be a new leader.
Re new leader. Please explain to me the process, time involved, and how that benefits brexit
May will resign after losing the vote by a huge margin.
Either way this is about picking a path from the three alternatives for April 2019. Parliament would have failed. So it’s back to the people who have a right to choose from all three possibilities.
There aren’t 3 paths
Think of it as a journey
We came to a fork in the road marked Remain and Leave
We chose the Leave path
Now we have come to a fork marked Deal or No Deal (we must be in Kent)
So we can choose one of those
You don’t get to scamper back up the road because you really want to ignore the fact that a majority of those who voted in the referendum voted to leave
That’s like the guy who invents a “house rule” in the middle of a card game that strangely always benefits the proposer
In every journey I've ever been on, I've had the right to turn around and take the other fork if I've been getting lost or if the road gets worse. And the three point turn is still taught in the driving test, I believe. The "must press on, cannot ever turn around even if the majority now want to" rule smacks more of being a made-up house rule.
If we voted remain we would never get the chance to change our minds if the majority regretted our decision 2 years later. That would be it.
This argument is purely trotted about by people who want to remain and will do or say anything to get it to happen.
Wouldn't we? Cameron promised the referendum because he was worried about losing votes to UKIP. If the public became dissatisfied with the referendum result, why wouldn't the same dynamic occur again? Or even UKIP- or some other pro-referendum party getting enough MPs to force the issue?
At the end of the day the decision in #Brexit1 was a question of principle. No one really has the right to say that Brexit must include A or B or exclude X or Y. This Parliament was overwhelmingly elected on manifestos committed to implementing the vote. Disregarding that vote now because it lacked specification when no such precision is available is disingenuous and dishonest.
But they are saying exactly that.
To implement a Brexit which includes A but excludes B without confirmation from "the people" could be seen as undemocratic since we don't know if that particular flavour of Brexit has majority support.
One of the most potent arguments for a second referendum is that we didn't know what we were voting for and now we have a concrete proposal on the table. Unfortunately, the argument is rubbish.
If we have remain as an option in #Brexit2: vote harder what does it mean? Firstly, it is not in our gift. The Greeks voted for all sorts of things in their negotiations with the EU. It made no difference whatsoever because the EU were not bound by their votes. This wasn't destroying democracy as some claimed at the time, it was simple recognition of the fact that a demos does not have the right, short of conquest, to decide things for anyone else.
So, if we assume that the CJEU decide we cannot rescind Article 50, what are the conditions that the EU would impose on consent? The rebate? The cost of the negotiations? One of our other opt outs? An undertaking that we won't try again for, say, 20 years? What if they just say no, enough?
One of the consequences of leaving is that the European Medicines Agency is moving to Amsterdam, even if their staff seem reluctant to shift. Do we get it back? The ECB operations in London are being wound down. Do we get them back? If we don't get our share of goodies from the EU is paying even more of a subscription for less a good deal? How much will our net contribution go up by?
Very similar criticisms can be made of the other possible options. May's deal is a WA, not a final deal at all. What will that final deal look like? Do we really have any better idea than we did at the time of the referendum? It depends on so many factors, not least who will be in power in the UK and negotiating it.
Does no deal really mean no deal at all? Or does it mean mini deals? If so, which ones, agreed by who, when, how?
At the end of the day the decision in #Brexit1 was a question of principle. No one really has the right to say that Brexit must include A or B or exclude X or Y. This Parliament was overwhelmingly elected on manifestos committed to implementing the vote. Disregarding that vote now because it lacked specification when no such precision is available is disingenuous and dishonest.
Regarding the terms of remaining, we could, y'know, ask?
Either way this is about picking a path from the three alternatives for April 2019. Parliament would have failed. So it’s back to the people who have a right to choose from all three possibilities.
Isn't it two choices as things stand?
There are three, remain, deal and no deal, which is the default. That’s it. Essentially one of those will happen in just four months time.
It will reduce to one or two next Tuesday. One if the Deal passes, Two if it does not (A50 withdrawal* vs No Deal).
*A50 withdrawal is not quite synonymous with Remain, though in practice is likely to be.
No it will not.
If as we expect deal falls it will still have been backed by 200 plus mps with the combined no deal/remain 400 plus. You may want to dish the deal but as Gina Miller said today it has to be all three to be fair to everyone. And I thought she was a heroine of yours
If the Deal has been voted down by MPs, then why would they ask for it to be included in a #peoplesvote?
The Deal would be dead if voted down, though as I have predicted before the Tory backbenchers are likely to funk bringing down their own government.
By that logic Remain - which has been voted down by the people - shouldn’t be included either
On Foxy’s second point, yes, there will be no VONC. But there will be a new leader.
Re new leader. Please explain to me the process, time involved, and how that benefits brexit
May will resign after losing the vote by a huge margin.
Either way this is about picking a path from the three alternatives for April 2019. Parliament would have failed. So it’s back to the people who have a right to choose from all three possibilities.
Isn't it two choices as things stand?
There are three, remain, deal and no deal, which is the default. That’s it. Essentially one of those will happen in just four months time.
It will reduce to one or two next Tuesday. One if the Deal passes, Two if it does not (A50 withdrawal* vs No Deal).
*A50 withdrawal is not quite synonymous with Remain, though in practice is likely to be.
No it will not.
If as we expect deal falls it will still have been backed by 200 plus mps with the combined no deal/remain 400 plus. You may want to dish the deal but as Gina Miller said today it has to be all three to be fair to everyone. And I thought she was a heroine of yours
If the Deal has been voted down by MPs, then why would they ask for it to be included in a #peoplesvote?
The Deal would be dead if voted down, though as I have predicted before the Tory backbenchers are likely to funk bringing down their own government.
By that logic Remain - which has been voted down by the people - shouldn’t be included either
On Foxy’s second point, yes, there will be no VONC. But there will be a new leader.
Re new leader. Please explain to me the process, time involved, and how that benefits brexit
May will resign after losing the vote by a huge margin.
You obviously do not know her
Not personally, no. But the dynamics of politics are such that if half your own party votes against your flagship policy, you don’t get another go.
Plus, getting the 48 would be no problem if she tires to cling on.
I wish it weren’t so, but denying either is like suggesting that gravity doesn’t apply any more.
Either way this is about picking a path from the three alternatives for April 2019. Parliament would have failed. So it’s back to the people who have a right to choose from all three possibilities.
Or if Parliament has failed pick a new Parliament.
That’s the Labour line, but as Starmer said May has run down the clock deliberately taking alternatives off the table. So we’re left with a vote.
A General Election can be run a lot sooner than a referendum unless you want to leave the result open to endless challenge by driving a coach & horses through Electoral Commission guidelines.
A general election isn't asking a relevant question to resolving brexit.
And a general election leaves no deal in place by default. The time for a GE makes no deal almost certain
The Feb '74 election wasn't called until the beginning of the month. I realise the FTPA complicates the position. but the HoC voted on 19th April. for an election on June 8th. I suspect that if it hadn't been for the locals that time could have been reduced, although the two public holidays obviously extended things a bit.
How about an election to decide if we should have a referendum? I think a GE first is more legitimate, as with Harold Wilson promising an exceptional referendum if he won the Oct. 1974 election ... which he did.
The internet says that according to an 1983 Act, GEs take min. 17 working days, say from Tue. 5 Feb. to Thur. 28 Feb. 2019.
But it appears that a referendum would take a f*** of a lot longer and that might bring us up against, er, the EU Parliament elections
So Farage would probably stand again in the hope of more gravy from Brussels ... ahem, honourable employment as a representative of his constituents. Meanwhile though they'd show the idiots who think the EU is less democratic than Whitehall the workings of democracy and that the EU uses a fairer voting system called PR.
The EU would no doubt agree to suspend talks while democracy takes its course. But it might not be very amused at the clash of these two events.
The FTPA has changed the period required between Dissolution and Polling Day. It is now 25 days rather than 17. Prior to that there would have to be a Parliamentary vote to authorise any early election. In practice six weeks would probably be needed.
Either way this is about picking a path from the three alternatives for April 2019. Parliament would have failed. So it’s back to the people who have a right to choose from all three possibilities.
There aren’t 3 paths
Think of it as a journey
We came to a fork in the road marked Remain and Leave
We chose the Leave path
Now we have come to a fork marked Deal or No Deal (we must be in Kent)
So we can choose one of those
You don’t get to scamper back up the road because you really want to ignore the fact that a majority of those who voted in the referendum voted to leave
That’s like the guy who invents a “house rule” in the middle of a card game that strangely always benefits the proposer
Your model is wrong. Remain is a completely viable option. It should be put to the people.
Either way this is about picking a path from the three alternatives for April 2019. Parliament would have failed. So it’s back to the people who have a right to choose from all three possibilities.
Isn't it two choices as things stand?
There are three, remain, deal and no deal, which is the default. That’s it. Essentially one of those will happen in just four months time.
It will reduce to one or two next Tuesday. One if the Deal passes, Two if it does not (A50 withdrawal* vs No Deal).
*A50 withdrawal is not quite synonymous with Remain, though in practice is likely to be.
No it will not.
If as we expect deal falls it will still have been backed by 200 plus mps with the combined no deal/remain 400 plus. You may want to dish the deal but as Gina Miller said today it has to be all three to be fair to everyone. And I thought she was a heroine of yours
If the Deal has been voted down by MPs, then why would they ask for it to be included in a #peoplesvote?
The Deal would be dead if voted down, though as I have predicted before the Tory backbenchers are likely to funk bringing down their own government.
By that logic Remain - which has been voted down by the people - shouldn’t be included either
On Foxy’s second point, yes, there will be no VONC. But there will be a new leader.
Re new leader. Please explain to me the process, time involved, and how that benefits brexit
May will resign after losing the vote by a huge margin.
I hate making specific predictions (general ones are a different matter... ) but resigning is out-of-character for May. As Ken Clarke said, she is a bloody difficult woman and such people don't often run away when it gets hard (contrast Cameron, who did exactly that). So if (when?) the vote fails, I don't see her resigning.
At the end of the day the decision in #Brexit1 was a question of principle. No one really has the right to say that Brexit must include A or B or exclude X or Y. This Parliament was overwhelmingly elected on manifestos committed to implementing the vote. Disregarding that vote now because it lacked specification when no such precision is available is disingenuous and dishonest.
But they are saying exactly that.
To implement a Brexit which includes A but excludes B without confirmation from "the people" could be seen as undemocratic since we don't know if that particular flavour of Brexit has majority support.
They are wrong to say it. The ERG has no right to determine what the vote meant other than to leave. It did not exclude a CU or even the CU. It did not exclude membership of the SM. It did not even exclude free movement. Of course the people espousing the leave argument had views on these matters and the polling might indicate what people thought were compelling arguments but that is very different from saying that there was a majority for X or Y. There wasn't. To take the most extreme example if 90% of those who voted leave were committed to ending FoM but 10% were not of that view but voted leave for other reasons there was not a majority for ending FoM.
The job of our elected government is to implement the vote on the best possible terms for the UK. May says she has done that and it is the best option available. Whether she had done a lousy job or not is past praying for. She is factually correct that this is the deal that the elected government has managed to negotiate and it does implement the vote. MPs who were elected on the basis of implementing the vote should therefore vote for it. Anything else is dishonest.
Either way this is about picking a path from the three alternatives for April 2019. Parliament would have failed. So it’s back to the people who have a right to choose from all three possibilities.
Isn't it two choices as things stand?
There are three, remain, deal and no deal, which is the default. That’s it. Essentially one of those will happen in just four months time.
It will reduce to one or two next Tuesday. One if the Deal passes, Two if it does not (A50 withdrawal* vs No Deal).
*A50 withdrawal is not quite synonymous with Remain, though in practice is likely to be.
No it will not.
If as we expect deal falls it will still have been backed by 200 plus mps with the combined no deal/remain 400 plus. You may want to dish the deal but as Gina Miller said today it has to be all three to be fair to everyone. And I thought she was a heroine of yours
If the Deal has been voted down by MPs, then why would they ask for it to be included in a #peoplesvote?
The Deal would be dead if voted down, though as I have predicted before the Tory backbenchers are likely to funk bringing down their own government.
By that logic Remain - which has been voted down by the people - shouldn’t be included either
On Foxy’s second point, yes, there will be no VONC. But there will be a new leader.
Re new leader. Please explain to me the process, time involved, and how that benefits brexit
May will resign after losing the vote by a huge margin.
You obviously do not know her
Not personally, know. But the dynamics of politics are such that if half your own party votes against your flagship policy, you don’t get another go.
Plus, getting the 48 would be no problem if she tires to cling on.
I wish it weren’t so, but denying either is like suggesting that gravity doesn’t apply any more.
The conservative mps will support TM in a vnoc over fear of Boris.
Indeed the party would be in crisis as upto 20 remainers resign and join the lib dems on Boris appointment
You seem to be blinkered in thinking that somehow you will capture the party for your economic vandalism on our country
One of the most potent arguments for a second referendum is that we didn't know what we were voting for and now we have a concrete proposal on the table. Unfortunately, the argument is rubbish.
If we have remain as an option in #Brexit2: vote harder what does it mean? Firstly, it is not in our gift. The Greeks voted for all sorts of things in their negotiations with the EU. It made no difference whatsoever because the EU were not bound by their votes. This wasn't destroying democracy as some claimed at the time, it was simple recognition of the fact that a demos does not have the right, short of conquest, to decide things for anyone else.
So, if we assume that the CJEU decide we cannot rescind Article 50, what are the conditions that the EU would impose on consent? The rebate? The cost of the negotiations? One of our other opt outs? An undertaking that we won't try again for, say, 20 years? What if they just say no, enough?
One of the consequences of leaving is that the European Medicines Agency is moving to Amsterdam, even if their staff seem reluctant to shift. Do we get it back? The ECB operations in London are being wound down. Do we get them back? If we don't get our share of goodies from the EU is paying even more of a subscription for less a good deal? How much will our net contribution go up by?
Very similar criticisms can be made of the other possible options. May's deal is a WA, not a final deal at all. What will that final deal look like? Do we really have any better idea than we did at the time of the referendum? It depends on so many factors, not least who will be in power in the UK and negotiating it.
Does no deal really mean no deal at all? Or does it mean mini deals? If so, which ones, agreed by who, when, how?
At the end of the day the decision in #Brexit1 was a question of principle. No one really has the right to say that Brexit must include A or B or exclude X or Y. This Parliament was overwhelmingly elected on manifestos committed to implementing the vote. Disregarding that vote now because it lacked specification when no such precision is available is disingenuous and dishonest.
Regarding the terms of remaining, we could, y'know, ask?
And spend another year or two negotiating the terms, perhaps. What happens in the meantime?
Either way this is about picking a path from the three alternatives for April 2019. Parliament would have failed. So it’s back to the people who have a right to choose from all three possibilities.
Isn't it two choices as things stand?
There are three, remain, deal and no deal, which is the default. That’s it. Essentially one of those will happen in just four months time.
It will reduce to one or two next Tuesday. One if the Deal passes, Two if it does not (A50 withdrawal* vs No Deal).
*A50 withdrawal is not quite synonymous with Remain, though in practice is likely to be.
No it will not.
If as we expect deal falls it will still have been backed by 200 plus mps with the combined no deal/remain 400 plus. You may want to dish the deal but as Gina Miller said today it has to be all three to be fair to everyone. And I thought she was a heroine of yours
If the Deal has been voted down by MPs, then why would they ask for it to be included in a #peoplesvote?
The Deal would be dead if voted down, though as I have predicted before the Tory backbenchers are likely to funk bringing down their own government.
By that logic Remain - which has been voted down by the people - shouldn’t be included either
On Foxy’s second point, yes, there will be no VONC. But there will be a new leader.
Re new leader. Please explain to me the process, time involved, and how that benefits brexit
May will resign after losing the vote by a huge margin.
You obviously do not know her
Not personally, know. But the dynamics of politics are such that if half your own party votes against your flagship policy, you don’t get another go.
Plus, getting the 48 would be no problem if she tires to cling on.
I wish it weren’t so, but denying either is like suggesting that gravity doesn’t apply any more.
The conservative mps will support TM in a vnoc over fear of Boris.
Indeed the party would be in crisis as upto remainers resign and join the lib dems on Boris appointment
You seem to be blinkered in thinking that somehow you will capture the party for your economic vandalism on our country
Big G. I want the deal to pass.
But it isn’t going to. And the result will not be ‘nothing has changed’.
Either way this is about picking a path from the three alternatives for April 2019. Parliament would have failed. So it’s back to the people who have a right to choose from all three possibilities.
Or if Parliament has failed pick a new Parliament.
That’s the Labour line, but as Starmer said May has run down the clock deliberately taking alternatives off the table. So we’re left with a vote.
A General Election can be run a lot sooner than a referendum unless you want to leave the result open to endless challenge by driving a coach & horses through Electoral Commission guidelines.
A general election isn't asking a relevant question to resolving brexit.
And a general election leaves no deal in place by default. The time for a GE makes no deal almost certain
The Feb '74 election wasn't called until the beginning of the month. I realise the FTPA complicates the position. but the HoC voted on 19th April. for an election on June 8th. I suspect that if it hadn't been for the locals that time could have been reduced, although the two public holidays obviously extended things a bit.
The internet says that according to an 1983 Act, GEs take min. 17 working days, say from Tue. 5 Feb. to Thur. 28 Feb. 2019.
But it appears that a referendum would take a f*** of a lot longer and that might bring us up against, er, the EU Parliament elections
So Farage would probably stand again in the hope of more gravy from Brussels ... ahem, honourable employment as a representative of his constituents. Meanwhile though they'd show the idiots who think the EU is less democratic than Whitehall the workings of democracy and that the EU uses a fairer voting system called PR.
The EU would no doubt agree to suspend talks while democracy takes its course. But it might not be very amused at the clash of these two events.
The FTPA has changed the period required between Dissolution an Polling Day. It is now 25 days rather than 17. Prior to that there would have to be a Parliamentary vote to authorise any early election. In practice six weeks would probably be needed.
That's about right. There's just about time, after the Parliamentary recess, for one in early March.
I don't want to have another referendum until we've been told when the referendum after that one is going to be held. The biggest lie in 2016 seems to me to be that it was going to be the final say.
Either way this is about picking a path from the three alternatives for April 2019. Parliament would have failed. So it’s back to the people who have a right to choose from all three possibilities.
Isn't it two choices as things stand?
There are three, remain, deal and no deal, which is the default. That’s it. Essentially one of those will happen in just four months time.
It will reduce to one or two next Tuesday. One if the Deal passes, Two if it does not (A50 withdrawal* vs No Deal).
*A50 withdrawal is not quite synonymous with Remain, though in practice is likely to be.
No it will not.
If as we expect deal falls it will still have been backed by 200 plus mps with the combined no deal/remain 400 plus. You may want to dish the deal but as Gina Miller said today it has to be all three to be fair to everyone. And I thought she was a heroine of yours
If the Deal has been voted down by MPs, then why would they ask for it to be included in a #peoplesvote?
The Deal would be dead if voted down, though as I have predicted before the Tory backbenchers are likely to funk bringing down their own government.
By that logic Remain - which has been voted down by the people - shouldn’t be included either
On Foxy’s second point, yes, there will be no VONC. But there will be a new leader.
Re new leader. Please explain to me the process, time involved, and how that benefits brexit
May will resign after losing the vote by a huge margin.
Either way this is about picking a path from the three alternatives for April 2019. Parliament would have failed. So it’s back to the people who have a right to choose from all three possibilities.
Or if Parliament has failed pick a new Parliament.
That’s the Labour line, but as Starmer said May has run down the clock deliberately taking alternatives off the table. So we’re left with a vote.
A General Election can be run a lot sooner than a referendum unless you want to leave the result open to endless challenge by driving a coach & horses through Electoral Commission guidelines.
A general election isn't asking a relevant question to resolving brexit.
And a general election leaves no deal in place by default. The time for a GE makes no deal almost certain
The Feb '74 election wasn't called until the beginning of the month. I realise the FTPA complicates the position. but the HoC voted on 19th April. for an election on June 8th. I suspect that if it hadn't been for the locals that time could have been reduced, although the two public holidays obviously extended things a bit.
The internet says that according to an 1983 Act, GEs take min. 17 working days, say from Tue. 5 Feb. to Thur. 28 Feb. 2019.
But it appears that a referendum would take a f*** of a lot longer and that might bring us up against, er, the EU Parliament elections
So Farage would probably stand again in the hope of more gravy from Brussels ... ahem, honourable employment as a representative of his constituents. Meanwhile though they'd show the idiots who think the EU is less democratic than Whitehall the workings of democracy and that the EU uses a fairer voting system called PR.
The EU would no doubt agree to suspend talks while democracy takes its course. But it might not be very amused at the clash of these two events.
The FTPA has changed the period required between Dissolution an Polling Day. It is now 25 days rather than 17. Prior to that there would have to be a Parliamentary vote to authorise any early election. In practice six weeks would probably be needed.
That's about right. There's just about time, after the Parliamentary recess, for one in early March.
If no Dissolution occurs before Xmas , I suspect the earliest dates for Polling Day would be 14th February or 21st February.
Either way this is about picking a path from the three alternatives for April 2019. Parliament would have failed. So it’s back to the people who have a right to choose from all three possibilities.
Isn't it two choices as things stand?
There are three, remain, deal and no deal, which is the default. That’s it. Essentially one of those will happen in just four months time.
It will reduce to one or two next Tuesday. One if the Deal passes, Two if it does not (A50 withdrawal* vs No Deal).
*A50 withdrawal is not quite synonymous with Remain, though in practice is likely to be.
No it will not.
If the Deal has been voted down by MPs, then why would they ask for it to be included in a #peoplesvote?
.
By that logic Remain - which has been voted down by the people - shouldn’t be included either
On Foxy’s second point, yes, there will be no VONC. But there will be a new leader.
Re new leader. Please explain to me the process, time involved, and how that benefits brexit
May will resign after losing the vote by a huge margin.
You obviously do not know her
Not personally, know. But the dynamics of politics are such that if half your own party votes against your flagship policy, you don’t get another go.
Plus, getting the 48 would be no problem if she tires to cling on.
I wish it weren’t so, but denying either is like suggesting that gravity doesn’t apply any more.
The conservative mps will support TM in a vnoc over fear of Boris.
Indeed the party would be in crisis as upto remainers resign and join the lib dems on Boris appointment
You seem to be blinkered in thinking that somehow you will capture the party for your economic vandalism on our country
Big G. I want the deal to pass.
But it isn’t going to. And the result will not be ‘nothing has changed’.
Well if so you should be doing everything to support TM, not undermining her with threats of vnoc
My wife and I have written a joint hard hitting letter to our conservative mp, who supports a second referendum, to back TM deal and TM in a vnoc
There’s no chance no deal would get on any ballot . The Electoral Commission won’t allow such a vague question that would be open to legal challenges. And this will become divisive because the minority of the public thinking no deal is acceptable will scream betrayal . The no dealers either don’t understand the consequences or don’t care . I’m worried about another vote but no deal has no mandate , Leavers saying now people voted for no deal are liars because if no deal had been on the agenda in 2016 they wouldn’t have won the vote .
1. In 2016 leavers did not know what they are voting for but they will now. 2. Parliament are blocking the Brexit negotiated by the government.
1 is nonsense. People will not know what they are voting for. The Deal does not define the future relationship and No Deal could mean many different things. As before Remain would be the only option which is defined and certain.
2 is not nonsense. It is the current situation. So, yes, that works as a practical justification.
In which case the politicians are saying to the public: "Ok. So you voted to leave the EU and we promised that we would respect your decision. However we have now decided otherwise. Sorry and all that. Have yourself another vote and get it right this time."
Not a great look. And 2 likely outcomes.
Leave wins again, maybe even in No Deal form. Dread to think. Narrow win for Remain. Dread to think.
The only 'good' outcome would be a landslide for Remain. Can't see that somehow.
One thing in May's favour on "the vote" is that opponents are still talking in abstracts. Once opponents actually get down to trying to put forward 'reasoned' amendments they are bound to cause problems for them. The difficulties and questions involved in a referendum have been debated on here ad nauseam. They have not been answered. An amendment to the vote cannot simply say "have a referendum" - it has to go into more detail on what a referendum would involve.
There is a reason why by an large the Labour frontbench are not getting involved in this debate and are talking about "an election". Because an election allows them to avoid discussing (in Parliament) what they would do differently to the Withdrawal agreement.
No doubt if they won an election they would basically implement May's deal on the Withdrawal agreement, albeit they would argue they will take a different approach to the final trade talks.
That is what is so silly about the whole thing. Unless you are in favour of remain, the real battle is over the final trade deal. Whether (sensible) Tory or Labour, the withdrawal agreement will be pretty much identical.
There’s no chance no deal would get on any ballot . The Electoral Commission won’t allow such a vague question that would be open to legal challenges. And this will become divisive because the minority of the public thinking no deal is acceptable will scream betrayal . The no dealers either don’t understand the consequences or don’t care . I’m worried about another vote but no deal has no mandate , Leavers saying now people voted for no deal are liars because if no deal had been on the agenda in 2016 they wouldn’t have won the vote .
It is not a vague question. It is default in law and the law is the mandate so it has to be on the ballot unless the HOC legislates if off, but then something has to go in its place.
There are a growing number of posters, including myself, warning everyone we are within weeks of an unstoppable no deal exit
I don't want to have another referendum until we've been told when the referendum after that one is going to be held. The biggest lie in 2016 seems to me to be that it was going to be the final say.
It never does. Look at Scotland. Apparently a generation there is two years.
And this was much closer than the vote in Scotland.
Either way this is about picking a path from the three alternatives for April 2019. Parliament would have failed. So it’s back to the people who have a right to choose from all three possibilities.
It will reduce to one or two next Tuesday. One if the Deal passes, Two if it does not (A50 withdrawal* vs No Deal).
*A50 withdrawal is not quite synonymous with Remain, though in practice is likely to be.
No it will not.
If the Deal has been voted down by MPs, then why would they ask for it to be included in a #peoplesvote?
.
By that logic Remain - which has been voted down by the people - shouldn’t be included either
On Foxy’s second point, yes, there will be no VONC. But there will be a new leader.
Re new leader. Please explain to me the process, time involved, and how that benefits brexit
May will resign after losing the vote by a huge margin.
You obviously do not know her
Not personally, know. But the dynamics of politics are such that if half your own party votes against your flagship policy, you don’t get another go.
Plus, getting the 48 would be no problem if she tires to cling on.
I wish it weren’t so, but denying either is like suggesting that gravity doesn’t apply any more.
The conservative mps will support TM in a vnoc over fear of Boris.
Indeed the party would be in crisis as upto remainers resign and join the lib dems on Boris appointment
You seem to be blinkered in thinking that somehow you will capture the party for your economic vandalism on our country
Big G. I want the deal to pass.
But it isn’t going to. And the result will not be ‘nothing has changed’.
Well if so you should be doing everything to support TM, not undermining her with threats of vnoc
My wife and I have written a joint hard hitting letter to our conservative mp, who supports a second referendum, to back TM deal and TM in a vnoc
Not threatening anything, but accepting reality. There is a real difference.
I'm focusing on local campaigning. We have local elections in May and lots of seats to fight!
1. In 2016 leavers did not know what they are voting for but they will now. 2. Parliament are blocking the Brexit negotiated by the government.
1 is nonsense. People will not know what they are voting for. The Deal does not define the future relationship and No Deal could mean many different things. As before Remain would be the only option which is defined and certain.
2 is not nonsense. It is the current situation. So, yes, that works as a practical justification.
In which case the politicians are saying to the public: "Ok. So you voted to leave the EU and we promised that we would respect your decision. However we have now decided otherwise. Sorry and all that. Have yourself another vote and get it right this time."
Not a great look. And 2 likely outcomes.
Leave wins again, maybe even in No Deal form. Dread to think. Narrow win for Remain. Dread to think.
The only 'good' outcome would be a landslide for Remain. Can't see that somehow.
Which is a pretty good summary of why I have always been implacably opposed to a second referendum (or 'people's vote' or 'the plebs got it wrong' or whatever Adonis is calling it this week).
Especially as I believe on a three way split No Deal would win.
Not personally, no. But the dynamics of politics are such that if half your own party votes against your flagship policy, you don’t get another go.
Plus, getting the 48 would be no problem if she tries to cling on.
I wish it weren’t so, but denying either is like suggesting that gravity doesn’t apply any more.
I'm sure you're right that the 48 can be reached. But I suspect that Tory MPs will then vote to keep her - the "no time for a novice" line of thought will reappear - and she's then secure for a year, unless they actually support a Labour VONC, which they won't. And I agree with BigG that she's just not going to say "Oh well, I give up" even if she should.
But she would be VERY unwise to take up the suggestion that she makes the first vote a vote of confidence in herself. That really would offer 48 unhappy Tory MPs an easy option - vote it down with Opposition support, feign regret at her resignation, and then nominate two Brexiteers for members to choose between.
Remainers will mostly rank (remain, deal, no deal) Conservative loyalists will split on 2nd prefs, but just about rank (deal, remain, no deal) Erg will tend to rank (no deal, remain, deal), but there are less than 48 of them so who cares. Other leavers will rank (no deal, deal, remain)
Deal likely to be eliminated in round one, with conservative loyalists just winning it for remain, but it will be close.
Why would Conservative loyalists vote Deal 1, Remain 2.
Yeh, they wouldn't.
Many I know would vote no deal only.
The vast majority wouldn't include Remain at all.
Interesting. The fuck business mentality has penetrated the party more than I thought. I had assumed that old school conservative bank managerial types would care more about economic impact.
You're assuming that LEAVE was intended to be in the interests of the United Kingdom. That's not necessarily the case. Consider the following:
Of Goodwin's 3 tribes that voted LEAVE (the poor, the retired, and wealthy social conservatives), one is loosely tied to the UK and one has high mobility and can easily live elsewhere.
Such people may place their loyalty in abstractions such as "the Anglosphere", "CANZUK", "the future" or some headcanon "Commonwealth" instead of the concrete reality of the UK, with schools, roads and businesses. They may not care if the real UK is fucked up, and for some people it's deliberate.
In short, for many LEAVEers, fucking up the UK is not a problem, and for some of those it's actively desirable: a feature, not a bug.
A techie question which I really ought to know the answer to, but I don't. An elderly relative has given me a flash drive on which he has dozens of Word files, some of which he'd be grateful if I could print out. He's asked me to send him a list of the file names so he can recall which ones he wants.
I can print out any individual file. But I find I have no idea how to print a list of all the file names, short of copying them one by one. Can anyone help?
Open up the command line (cmd at the start menu). Go to the relevant directory. Then dir * > listing.txt
to get the contents into listing.txt (filenames with other info)
If you want just .doc files, then something like dir *.doc > listing.txt
edit: And if you want just the filenames and not filesizes: dir *.doc /b > listing.txt
A further tip is to browse to the folder in File Explorer and then select "open command prompt" from Explorers file menu. That way you start in right folder.
Behind every copy of Windows a bit of MS-DOS lingers on.
I thought 'open command prompt' was Powershell only ? For some odd reason only known by Microsoft..
(My knowledge of Windows has gone somewhat downhill since I stopped working.)
Either way this is about picking a path from the three alternatives for April 2019. Parliament would have failed. So it’s back to the people who have a right to choose from all three possibilities.
It will reduce to one or two next Tuesday. One if the Deal passes, Two if it does not (A50 withdrawal* vs No Deal).
*A50 withdrawal is not quite synonymous with Remain, though in practice is likely to be.
No it will not.
If the Deal has been voted down by MPs, then why would they ask for it to be included in a #peoplesvote?
.
By that logic Remain - which has been voted down by the people - shouldn’t be included either
On Foxy’s second point, yes, there will be no VONC. But there will be a new leader.
Re new leader. Please explain to me the process, time involved, and how that benefits brexit
May will resign after losing the vote by a huge margin.
You obviously do not know her
Not personally, know.
The conservative mps will support TM in a vnoc over fear of Boris.
Indeed the party would be in crisis as upto remainers resign and join the lib dems on Boris appointment
You seem to be blinkered in thinking that somehow you will capture the party for your economic vandalism on our country
Big G. I want the deal to pass.
But it isn’t going to. And the result will not be ‘nothing has changed’.
Well if so you should be doing everything to support TM, not undermining her with threats of vnoc
My wife and I have written a joint hard hitting letter to our conservative mp, who supports a second referendum, to back TM deal and TM in a vnoc
Not threatening anything, but accepting reality. There is a real difference.
I'm focusing on local campaigning. We have local elections in May and lots of seats to fight!
There is no reality in this other than in a few weeks we crash out in no deal
TM has put forward a plan that is the safest and best compromise on offer and the country could move on
MPs are playing with fire and it is the people who are going to be burnt
1. In 2016 leavers did not know what they are voting for but they will now. 2. Parliament are blocking the Brexit negotiated by the government.
1 is nonsense. People will not know what they are voting for. The Deal does not define the future relationship and No Deal could mean many different things. As before Remain would be the only option which is defined and certain.
2 is not nonsense. It is the current situation. So, yes, that works as a practical justification.
In which case the politicians are saying to the public: "Ok. So you voted to leave the EU and we promised that we would respect your decision. However we have now decided otherwise. Sorry and all that. Have yourself another vote and get it right this time."
Not a great look. And 2 likely outcomes.
Leave wins again, maybe even in No Deal form. Dread to think. Narrow win for Remain. Dread to think.
The only 'good' outcome would be a landslide for Remain. Can't see that somehow.
Which is a pretty good summary of why I have always been implacably opposed to a second referendum (or 'people's vote' or 'the plebs got it wrong' or whatever Adonis is calling it this week).
Especially as I believe on a three way split No Deal would win.
The trouble with being against a 2nd vote, is what is the alternative?
Either way this is about picking a path from the three alternatives for April 2019. Parliament would have failed. So it’s back to the people who have a right to choose from all three possibilities.
There aren’t 3 paths
Think of it as a journey
We came to a fork in the road marked Remain and Leave
We chose the Leave path
Now we have come to a fork marked Deal or No Deal (we must be in Kent)
So we can choose one of those
You don’t get to scamper back up the road because you really want to ignore the fact that a majority of those who voted in the referendum voted to leave
That’s like the guy who invents a “house rule” in the middle of a card game that strangely always benefits the proposer
Your model is wrong. Remain is a completely viable option. It should be put to the people.
Any referendum without Remain on the ballot would be subject to a boycott by the 48% and the result declared as illegitimate.
1. In 2016 leavers did not know what they are voting for but they will now. 2. Parliament are blocking the Brexit negotiated by the government.
1 is nonsense. People will not know what they are voting for. The Deal does not define the future relationship and No Deal could mean many different things. As before Remain would be the only option which is defined and certain.
2 is not nonsense. It is the current situation. So, yes, that works as a practical justification.
In which case the politicians are saying to the public: "Ok. So you voted to leave the EU and we promised that we would respect your decision. However we have now decided otherwise. Sorry and all that. Have yourself another vote and get it right this time."
Not a great look. And 2 likely outcomes.
Leave wins again, maybe even in No Deal form. Dread to think. Narrow win for Remain. Dread to think.
The only 'good' outcome would be a landslide for Remain. Can't see that somehow.
Which is a pretty good summary of why I have always been implacably opposed to a second referendum (or 'people's vote' or 'the plebs got it wrong' or whatever Adonis is calling it this week).
Especially as I believe on a three way split No Deal would win.
The trouble with being against a 2nd vote, is what is the alternative?
There isn't one.
Get ready for May/June.
Leaving without a deal, and then invoking emergency powers to post exit sign the deal with no vote....
Either way this is about picking a path from the three alternatives for April 2019. Parliament would have failed. So it’s back to the people who have a right to choose from all three possibilities.
It will reduce to one or two next Tuesday. One if the Deal passes, Two if it does not (A50 withdrawal* vs No Deal).
*A50 withdrawal is not quite synonymous with Remain, though in practice is likely to be.
No it will not.
If the Deal has been voted down by MPs, then why would they ask for it to be included in a #peoplesvote?
.
By that logic Remain - which has been voted down by the people - shouldn’t be included either
On Foxy’s second point, yes, there will be no VONC. But there will be a new leader.
Re new leader. Please explain to me the process, time involved, and how that benefits brexit
May will resign after losing the vote by a huge margin.
You obviously do not know her
Not personally, know.
I wish it weren’t so, but denying either is like suggesting that gravity doesn’t apply any more.
The conservative mps will support TM in a vnoc over fear of Boris.
Indeed the party would be in crisis as upto remainers resign and join the lib dems on Boris appointment
You seem to be blinkered in thinking that somehow you will capture the party for your economic vandalism on our country
Big G. I want the deal to pass.
But it isn’t going to. And the result will not be ‘nothing has changed’.
Well if so you should be doing everything to support TM, not undermining her with threats of vnoc
My wife and I have written a joint hard hitting letter to our conservative mp, who supports a second referendum, to back TM deal and TM in a vnoc
Not threatening anything, but accepting reality. There is a real difference.
I'm focusing on local campaigning. We have local elections in May and lots of seats to fight!
There’s no chance no deal would get on any ballot . The Electoral Commission won’t allow such a vague question that would be open to legal challenges. And this will become divisive because the minority of the public thinking no deal is acceptable will scream betrayal . The no dealers either don’t understand the consequences or don’t care . I’m worried about another vote but no deal has no mandate , Leavers saying now people voted for no deal are liars because if no deal had been on the agenda in 2016 they wouldn’t have won the vote .
It is not a vague question. It is default in law and the law is the mandate so it has to be on the ballot unless the HOC legislates if off, but then something has to go in its place.
There are a growing number of posters, including myself, warning everyone we are within weeks of an unstoppable no deal exit
The huge majority of the Commons will not support no deal . If May goes and a new leader comes in saying their policy is no deal they will be toast . Do you seriously think MPs are going to sit there with the pound imploding , businesses heading for the exit and are going to say fine.
Comments
What choice have the voters got?
Unless UKIP or a successor anti-establishment Party appears and wins 30%+ of the vote, that can't really happen. FPTP entrenches the existing parties too well.
The internet says that according to an 1983 Act, GEs take min. 17 working days, say from Tue. 5 Feb. to Thur. 28 Feb. 2019.
But it appears that a referendum would take a f*** of a lot longer and that might bring us up against, er, the EU Parliament elections
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Parliament_election,_2019
So Farage would probably stand again in the hope of more gravy from Brussels ... ahem, honourable employment as a representative of his constituents. Meanwhile though they'd show the idiots who think the EU is less democratic than Whitehall the workings of democracy and that the EU uses a fairer voting system called PR.
The EU would no doubt agree to suspend talks while democracy takes its course. But it might not be very amused at the clash of these two events.
Then paste into Paint, cut that image down to just the files, and you've got a list of the files. It's an image rather than a load of text, but the information is there and readily readable.
You may have to do it a few times if the list is very long, but you'll get 20-30+ names each time you screenshot and paste.
May isn't going to do this as it would lose the Tories massive amounts of support from their leave voters. Also she doesn't want to show that it is still possible to remain as that would lose what little support she has for the deal.
So how can referendum with remain as an option happen?
After the first vote is lost:
May will promise to rethink before bringing an amended version for voting on.
The ERGers will have another go at deposing May. Can they reach 48 letters after May is defeated on her only policy?
Labour will seek a VONC, which can only pass if the DUP want it to. Will the DUP bring down the government or hold out for a change in Tory party leadership?
The most likely scenario still seems to me that May will find some form of words to allow the DUP and some ERGers to climb down, although I must admit the reports around the suppressed legal advice makes this less likely than it was.
There are fascinating what-ifs.
What if Boris promised EFTA for now and then a referendum?
All depends on May.
She either needs to get her party (and the DUP) on board; OR she needs to find a cross-party majority even in the face of large sections of her own party; OR she needs to throw it to the public via a general election.
And she needs to find one of these solutions before someone else (Corbyn, Gove, Johnson) does.
Any sensible business is reorienting to the rest of the EU right now. Even Rees-Mogg is doing it. This is not necessarily to our advantage in the UK.
Could she have a vilage built, like the Cadburys or Titus Salt?
More likely for him if he does want to return to the Commons is that he wins another term as Mayor in 2020 and then finds a seat for the GE in 2022 - assuming that the Tories are so fearful of the electorate that they take this Parliament the distance and are not forced to go to the voters early.
Must include No Deal because otherwise a big chunk of leave opinion is disenfranchised.
Cannot include No Deal because it is ill defined.
Must include The Deal because that is what is on offer.
Cannot include The Deal because it does not agree the future relationship.
Must include Remain because, well it must.
Cannot include Remain because the 2016 referendum has ruled it out.
Not happening. If it does I will eat my favourite socks.
(Gove on Marr. Another virtuoso performance. League of his own. If the tories go for anyone else as next leader they are IMO nuts. So no doubt they will.)
I think leavers will be making a very major error if they manoeuvre the UK out of the EU without a deal and without ensuring that that is what the country actually now wants.
The prospect of leaving without a deal was dismissed as "Project Fear" by the leave campaigns IIRC so I really do not see how you could possibly go down that route without further reference to the voters.
[I do like the idea behind Saltaire. As an aside, some are worried it's going to be screwed up (it's a heritage site) by more transport infrastructure].
The wife of a friend was born there. Says it was quite a good place to live, all things considered.
There is no way to trigger a new referendum, even if there were time, unless the Govt do it.
There is no easy route for a new Govt
There isn’t a 2/3rds majority for a GE
The default is no deal, now.
Congratulations. One of the best anti-Brexit analogies yet
And the three point turn is still taught in the driving test, I believe.
The "must press on, cannot ever turn around even if the majority now want to" rule smacks more of being a made-up house rule.
King Cole (2), aye, covered in Vanished Kingdoms by Norman Davies. Montenegro was on our side but the deposition of the Tsar, who likely would've stood up for them, meant they got swallowed up by Serbia.
Tory MPs won’t vote for a new election until Brexit is completed, and probably for a long while after.
Its not my first choice but to say no one wants it is clearly ludicrous. Currently polling shows it is the preferred choice of some 30% of the population in a three way choice and 45% in a 2 way with Remain.
Got a small spot of work which involves listening to stuff. And two days after that my left earphone has decided to stop working at random.
Edited extra bit: hmm. Might have a spare pair... have to check.
I am not personally a Kahn fan but the idea that every Mayor (or PM) needs to be fronting revolution of some kind or another is very tiring.
I've probably done my geek cred no good by admitting I use the Windows command line. But sometimes it's so darned useful ...
Does Julian Lewis know something we don’t, or is he on crack?
Dan recommends May puts her own premiership on the line in order to get the vote through.
I meant, in Parliament.
For now, the path ahead is in the hands of MPs.
Brady is the person who will know, not the Whip, who seems to be in a world of his own regarding this deal.
So you are predicting the 48 letters will be found, and a new leader elected to oversee No Deal?
If we have remain as an option in #Brexit2: vote harder what does it mean? Firstly, it is not in our gift. The Greeks voted for all sorts of things in their negotiations with the EU. It made no difference whatsoever because the EU were not bound by their votes. This wasn't destroying democracy as some claimed at the time, it was simple recognition of the fact that a demos does not have the right, short of conquest, to decide things for anyone else.
So, if we assume that the CJEU decide we cannot rescind Article 50, what are the conditions that the EU would impose on consent? The rebate? The cost of the negotiations? One of our other opt outs? An undertaking that we won't try again for, say, 20 years? What if they just say no, enough?
One of the consequences of leaving is that the European Medicines Agency is moving to Amsterdam, even if their staff seem reluctant to shift. Do we get it back? The ECB operations in London are being wound down. Do we get them back? If we don't get our share of goodies from the EU is paying even more of a subscription for less a good deal? How much will our net contribution go up by?
Very similar criticisms can be made of the other possible options. May's deal is a WA, not a final deal at all. What will that final deal look like? Do we really have any better idea than we did at the time of the referendum? It depends on so many factors, not least who will be in power in the UK and negotiating it.
Does no deal really mean no deal at all? Or does it mean mini deals? If so, which ones, agreed by who, when, how?
At the end of the day the decision in #Brexit1 was a question of principle. No one really has the right to say that Brexit must include A or B or exclude X or Y. This Parliament was overwhelmingly elected on manifestos committed to implementing the vote. Disregarding that vote now because it lacked specification when no such precision is available is disingenuous and dishonest.
Sadiq is an empty suit and his response to issues around crime, housing and transport has been pathetic.
Behind every copy of Windows a bit of MS-DOS lingers on.
This argument is purely trotted about by people who want to remain and will do or say anything to get it to happen.
That might not fit too well with your core assumptions and worldview, though.
To implement a Brexit which includes A but excludes B without confirmation from "the people" could be seen as undemocratic since we don't know if that particular flavour of Brexit has majority support.
Plus, getting the 48 would be no problem if she tires to cling on.
I wish it weren’t so, but denying either is like suggesting that gravity doesn’t apply any more.
The job of our elected government is to implement the vote on the best possible terms for the UK. May says she has done that and it is the best option available. Whether she had done a lousy job or not is past praying for. She is factually correct that this is the deal that the elected government has managed to negotiate and it does implement the vote. MPs who were elected on the basis of implementing the vote should therefore vote for it. Anything else is dishonest.
Indeed the party would be in crisis as upto 20 remainers resign and join the lib dems on Boris appointment
You seem to be blinkered in thinking that somehow you will capture the party for your economic vandalism on our country
But it isn’t going to. And the result will not be ‘nothing has changed’.
My wife and I have written a joint hard hitting letter to our conservative mp, who supports a second referendum, to back TM deal and TM in a vnoc
I used to be quite good at DOS and I was a slow Windows adopter - felt like dumbing down somehow. But it's been a while...
1. In 2016 leavers did not know what they are voting for but they will now.
2. Parliament are blocking the Brexit negotiated by the government.
1 is nonsense. People will not know what they are voting for. The Deal does not define the future relationship and No Deal could mean many different things. As before Remain would be the only option which is defined and certain.
2 is not nonsense. It is the current situation. So, yes, that works as a practical justification.
In which case the politicians are saying to the public: "Ok. So you voted to leave the EU and we promised that we would respect your decision. However we have now decided otherwise. Sorry and all that. Have yourself another vote and get it right this time."
Not a great look. And 2 likely outcomes.
Leave wins again, maybe even in No Deal form. Dread to think.
Narrow win for Remain. Dread to think.
The only 'good' outcome would be a landslide for Remain. Can't see that somehow.
There is a reason why by an large the Labour frontbench are not getting involved in this debate and are talking about "an election". Because an election allows them to avoid discussing (in Parliament) what they would do differently to the Withdrawal agreement.
No doubt if they won an election they would basically implement May's deal on the Withdrawal agreement, albeit they would argue they will take a different approach to the final trade talks.
That is what is so silly about the whole thing. Unless you are in favour of remain, the real battle is over the final trade deal. Whether (sensible) Tory or Labour, the withdrawal agreement will be pretty much identical.
There are a growing number of posters, including myself, warning everyone we are within weeks of an unstoppable no deal exit
And this was much closer than the vote in Scotland.
I'm focusing on local campaigning. We have local elections in May and lots of seats to fight!
Especially as I believe on a three way split No Deal would win.
But she would be VERY unwise to take up the suggestion that she makes the first vote a vote of confidence in herself. That really would offer 48 unhappy Tory MPs an easy option - vote it down with Opposition support, feign regret at her resignation, and then nominate two Brexiteers for members to choose between.
Tricky, innit?
Of Goodwin's 3 tribes that voted LEAVE (the poor, the retired, and wealthy social conservatives), one is loosely tied to the UK and one has high mobility and can easily live elsewhere.
Such people may place their loyalty in abstractions such as "the Anglosphere", "CANZUK", "the future" or some headcanon "Commonwealth" instead of the concrete reality of the UK, with schools, roads and businesses. They may not care if the real UK is fucked up, and for some people it's deliberate.
In short, for many LEAVEers, fucking up the UK is not a problem, and for some of those it's actively desirable: a feature, not a bug.
(My knowledge of Windows has gone somewhat downhill since I stopped working.)
TM has put forward a plan that is the safest and best compromise on offer and the country could move on
MPs are playing with fire and it is the people who are going to be burnt
There isn't one.
Get ready for May/June.