Looks like the GOP are up to some nasty tricks in WI and MI to strip the new Dem Governors of power whilst they still control the government in those states. Thank goodness we don’t have the idiocy of lame duck sessions here.
Looks like the GOP are up to some nasty tricks in WI and MI to strip the new Dem Governors of power whilst they still control the government in those states. Thank goodness we don’t have the idiocy of lame duck sessions here.
Looks like the GOP are up to some nasty tricks in WI and MI to strip the new Dem Governors of power whilst they still control the government in those states. Thank goodness we don’t have the idiocy of lame duck sessions here.
Being out in name only, which is the reality of May’s deal, is meaningless and will please no one. All it will do is ensure Brexit continues to dominate politics, which seems inevitable now, rather than allowing us to get on with the rest of our lives. How could the Tories be so inept as to keep her as their leader.
Being out in name only, which is the reality of May’s deal, is meaningless and will please no one. All it will do is ensure Brexit continues to dominate politics, which seems inevitable now, rather than allowing us to get on with the rest of our lives. How could the Tories be so inept as to keep her as their leader.
The only thing I'm sure of is that Brexit will continue to be news for the rest of my life.
Unlikely. So many in Westminster don't want him. But if it gets to the members, I think he probably still gets it, as the standard bearer for Brexit. Would he really Hard Brexit? I'm not sure he would, when it came down to it. Not out of choice. He'd be looking for some compromise. But at least he would make efforts to achieve that better deal. Unlike May, who has gone as far as she wants - even if it is not as far as she needs.
But I don't think he would shirk from delivering Brexit if he had to - once all the other options had fallen away. And I still wonder whether Hard Brexit might be the way to go. It has the benefit of starting the EU trade negotiations with a clean slate, rather than under the hideously compromised May deal. A trade arangement that could last decades. And there would no doubt be some initial economic hardship (although the death and famine doom will look to be ridiculously over-played when reality arrives).
But I do think - could it be a Black Wednesday Redux? Getting out of a European arrangement that initially caused economic mayhem, but proved self-evidently the right thing to do when it allowed the economy to power head. I could see Boris getting stuck in to deliver that. And at least the Tory MPs could remove him from Number 10 at a later date. The same can not be said if they have facilitated PM Corbyn.
I don't think Black Wednesday was self evidently the right thing to do.
With hindsight it had proved to be
At the time it was a balance between politics and economics with the politicians deciding in favour of politics
Yes, looking back our exit from the ERM was the firing of the starting gun on a decade and a half of unprecedented and uninterrupted economic growth.
It was difficult for a short while, as things adjusted to the new normal, but the U.K. is full of resourceful people who soon worked out how to benefit from the changed arrangements.
Mr. Slackbladder, no. My understanding, as asserted by Laura Kuenssberg and others, is that, as the rebate is not in any treaty, it can (and likely will) be phased out.
Schengen (Shengen?) and eurozone opt-outs are in treaties and would remain, ahem, if we were to stay in, but not if we were to rejoin.
> Also the Electoral Commission has declared that it needs 5 or 6 months notice for such a major vote to take place and that takes us to a late spring at the earliest.
I think this overstates the case a bit - they say they recommend 6 months, but they stress that it's not a legal requirement.
That said, I agree that it's getting too late for a referendum without an Article 50 extension. I think you can actually turn this on its head and say that it's an argument why TMay may have to agree to a referendum, even if she doesn't want to. If she wants to hang on to her job (seems in character), and she can't get her deal through parliament (it's looking a bit tricky) and the government hasn't done enough to prepare for No Deal (is hasn't) then she'll need the EU's permission to kick the can. And they'll only agree to that if there's something that might actually move things in a different direction: A general election (aargh) or a referendum.
Edit to add: ^ Post overtaken by events, apparently...
Being out in name only, which is the reality of May’s deal, is meaningless and will please no one. All it will do is ensure Brexit continues to dominate politics, which seems inevitable now, rather than allowing us to get on with the rest of our lives. How could the Tories be so inept as to keep her as their leader.
The only thing I'm sure of is that Brexit will continue to be news for the rest of my life.
Mr. Glenn, I'm enormously surprised by that ruling but it's got to put rocket-boosters under Remain MPs of various parties.
Edited extra bit: ah, does require full ruling though to become binding. But still helpful for Remainers in the Commons.
Yes, no reason to play for a reasonable brexit at all. As Philip Thompson raises, if this is confirmed what is to stop a nation from notifying and withdrawing over and over.
Brexit is dead. Remainers won't give up when they are so close and leavers won't unite behind anything to ensure it happens. As long as enough unite to stop no deal , brexit is now over and out.
If thats the case, that utterly puts no-deal off the table. No PM would allow No-deal to happen if they have the power to stop it. Even if they planned for it, parliment would step in to forbide them.
Unlikely. So many in Westminster don't want him. But if it gets to the members, I think he probably still gets it, as the standard bearer for Brexit. Would he really Hard Brexit? I'm not sure he would, when it came down to it. Not out of choice. He'd be looking for some compromise. But at least he would make efforts to achieve that better deal. Unlike May, who has gone as far as she wants - even if it is not as far as she needs.
But I don't think he would shirk from delivering Brexit if he had to - once all the other options had fallen away. And I still wonder whether Hard Brexit might be the way to go. It has the benefit of starting the EU trade negotiations with a clean slate, rather than under the hideously compromised May deal. A trade arangement that could last decades. And there would no doubt be some initial economic hardship (although the death and famine doom will look to be ridiculously over-played when reality arrives).
But I do think - could it be a Black Wednesday Redux? Getting out of a European arrangement that initially caused economic mayhem, but proved self-evidently the right thing to do when it allowed the economy to power head. I could see Boris getting stuck in to deliver that. And at least the Tory MPs could remove him from Number 10 at a later date. The same can not be said if they have facilitated PM Corbyn.
I don't think Black Wednesday was self evidently the right thing to do.
With hindsight it had proved to be
At the time it was a balance between politics and economics with the politicians deciding in favour of politics
Yes, looking back our exit from the ERM was the firing of the starting gun on a decade and a half of unprecedented and uninterrupted economic growth.
It was difficult for a short while, as things adjusted to the new normal, but the U.K. is full of resourceful people who soon worked out how to benefit from the changed arrangements.
As is usual in British political commentary, that's very inward looking. At a minimum that rather ignores the impact of the marketisation and growth of the Chinese economy. To give an indication, in 1997 Hong Kong made up around 18% of Chinese GDP. It's around 4% now and it's not as if its shrunk.
If thats the case, that utterly puts no-deal off the table. No PM would allow No-deal to happen if they have the power to stop it. Even if they planned for it, parliment would step in to forbide them.
Which means it's highly likely we're staying.
Nah, you voted Leave meant the possibility of No Deal.
Look at last night’s ComRes, the voters are prepared to an economic hit for Brexit.
Plus UKIP, now that they have confirmed they are the BNP/EDL in blazers will riot.
Most MPs will worry about suffering the same fate as Jo Cox if they revoke Brexit.
...provided that the revocation has been decided upon in accordance with the Member State’s constitutional requirements, is formally notified to the European Council and does not involve an abusive practice.
If thats the case, that utterly puts no-deal off the table. No PM would allow No-deal to happen if they have the power to stop it. Even if they planned for it, parliment would step in to forbide them.
Which means it's highly likely we're staying.
Nah, you voted Leave meant the possibility of No Deal.
Look at last night’s ComRes, the voters are prepared to an economic hit for Brexit.
Plus UKIP, now that they have confirmed they are the BNP/EDL in blazers will riot.
Most MPs will worry about suffering the same fate as Jo Cox if they revoke Brexit.
The people are keen for other people to take a hit. Have we heard at any stage that pensions or other state benefits will be reduced? The hit only applies to those who are employed.
“An abusive practice” presumably means revoking without the intention of remaining. So we could have a situation post March where the U.K. is at the ECJ arguing we haven’t left, and the European Council arguing we have...
Mr. Glenn, I'm enormously surprised by that ruling but it's got to put rocket-boosters under Remain MPs of various parties.
Edited extra bit: ah, does require full ruling though to become binding. But still helpful for Remainers in the Commons.
Yes, no reason to play for a reasonable brexit at all. As Philip Thompson raises, if this is confirmed what is to stop a nation from notifying and withdrawing over and over.
Brexit is dead. Remainers won't give up when they are so close and leavers won't unite behind anything to ensure it happens. As long as enough unite to stop no deal , brexit is now over and out.
Pretty much. Weird isn't it. Back in 2016 I couldn't see any way Brexit could be stopped. I hadn't reckoned with the stupidity of the leavers charged with implementing it.
Last chance saloon for the Brexiteers. Do you really want no brexit or BINO? Previously remain vs no deal looked like the options but if this ruling is right we are not no dealing, not if senior government figures and practically every other non Tory mp is talking about rationing and stuff.
Remain or deal. I don't see the dup changing their minds and this ruling means no labour remainer rebels will, but maybe it'll sway a few previously against. Not enough though.
If thats the case, that utterly puts no-deal off the table. No PM would allow No-deal to happen if they have the power to stop it. Even if they planned for it, parliment would step in to forbide them.
Which means it's highly likely we're staying.
Would parliament have a majority to do that? Presumably even if it has the rights to compel the PM to pull the lever it would still need to pass legislation, which in practice needs government support, etc etc.
Presumably if we were to 'cancel' Brexit, that would mean exactly the same rights as currently, ie, we keep the rebate?
I would have thought so.
Back to to status quo ante Article 50.
So just ignoring the largest vote in British history?
Probably. It will be very problematic. Some kind of vote may be sensible. But what to do? Leavers won't get anything through the commons and if this is right then parliament won't let us no deal.
If you don't want parliament to ignore the big vote there is a deal to leave on the table, get on to your old Etonian pals to take it.
f the CJEU agrees with the AG it puts the UK in an immensely powerful position. We can revoke A50 having found out exactly how the EU27 would handle a withdrawal negotiation. That gives us a hell of a lot of leverage for the future if we use this knowledge properly.
Be interesting to see whether the odds shift on Ladbrokes (he says, hoping no second referendum lengthens to about 5 so he can be nicely green either way).
Yes but it's a surprising opinion which remainers will all assume the judges will agree with. Whether that's right is less relevant than how it makes them act.
...provided that the revocation has been decided upon in accordance with the Member State’s constitutional requirements, is formally notified to the European Council and does not involve an abusive practice.
“Abusive practice” = something the Commission doesn’t like
f the CJEU agrees with the AG it puts the UK in an immensely powerful position. We can revoke A50 having found out exactly how the EU27 would handle a withdrawal negotiation. That gives us a hell of a lot of leverage for the future if we use this knowledge properly.
don't we end in same place though?
"backstop, backstop, Ireland, i hate customs unions, my unicorn is shiny etc etc etc"
Yes but it's a surprising opinion which remainers will all assume the judges will agree with. Whether that's right is less relevant than how it makes them act.
How long are we expecting until the actual judgement?
f the CJEU agrees with the AG it puts the UK in an immensely powerful position. We can revoke A50 having found out exactly how the EU27 would handle a withdrawal negotiation. That gives us a hell of a lot of leverage for the future if we use this knowledge properly.
Maybe this is an elaborate ploy to allow the EU to bend on the negotiation point, give may a last ditch boost, since they wouldn't want that?
Nah, too implausible.
Goodbye brexit, you're done. I hope the ERG truly believe inadequate brexit was not worth it otherwise they will soon be crying about this.
I don't think Black Wednesday was self evidently the right thing to do.
With hindsight it had proved to be
At the time it was a balance between politics and economics with the politicians deciding in favour of politics
Yes, looking back our exit from the ERM was the firing of the starting gun on a decade and a half of unprecedented and uninterrupted economic growth.
It was difficult for a short while, as things adjusted to the new normal, but the U.K. is full of resourceful people who soon worked out how to benefit from the changed arrangements.
As is usual in British political commentary, that's very inward looking. At a minimum that rather ignores the impact of the marketisation and growth of the Chinese economy. To give an indication, in 1997 Hong Kong made up around 18% of Chinese GDP. It's around 4% now and it's not as if its shrunk.
Quite the opposite.
The EU is inward-looking, protectionist (especially in agriculture), and spends years or even decades negotiating trade deals that go into excruciating detail on design of widgets - yet almost completely ignore financial services, intellectual property and developing technologies.
It’s a big wide world out there, and it’s growing massively compared to what’s going on in Europe, where the last recession is still being recovered from and many places still have huge unemployment.
(Looks out of window 3,500 miles away and counts 72 cranes in less than perfect visibility - on a good day it’s probably over a hundred)
The opportunity is massive and we have one chance to take it. Yes there will be some adjustment needed, and probably some temporary government intervention required in certain areas, but IMO the chance of success is too big to turn down.
A successful U.K. outside the EU terrifies the EU more than almost anything else, hence the way the negotiations have been played. Sadly our political leaders and their risk-averse civil servants have been taken along for the ride.
It's a very surprising opinion from the Advocate-General. It could scarcely be less helpful for the government seeking to corral Remainers into their pen.
We'll have to wait and see whether it is followed by the CJEU.
I hope Hague is right and HoC will use every single arcane procedure and twist to halt a No Deal Brexit, if May's plan falls.
Time to for MPs to step up to the plate and stop this madness in its tracks.
If Hague said that he should be ashamed of himself. Since when did Leave mean leave as long as it’s not on a no deal basis. If MPs wanted a better deal they should have been much more rigorous holding May to account and should have negotiated harder and obtained something worthwhile in the negotiations.
I've honestly tried to put my best unbiased probabilities on this. The result is:
May's deal goes through 47% (made up of 20% passed first time, 16% passed second time after a tweak with the EU, 15% as a result of a second referendum - probability 36% of this happening). Norway+ deal 15% (as a result of parliament successfully getting an A50 extension and going for this option rather than a second referendum)
No Brexit 22% (as a result of defeat of May's deal at first or second attempt 64% X UK asks for A50 extension 80% X Parliament agrees 2nd referendum 70% X No Brexit wins 60%)
No Deal 16% (made up of 13% Parliament opts for a managed no deal plus 3% as a result of a second referendum)
The probability of May's deal going through at first or second attempt in time for 29 March is 36%. If it doesn't go through, there is a 13% chance of a no deal - probably with a small extension for mini agreement to lesson the blow and a 51% chance of an agreed extension to A50.
So I think the chances of the UK leaving the EU on 29th March are surely less than 54%. I certainly wouldn't bet on it.
If thats the case, that utterly puts no-deal off the table. No PM would allow No-deal to happen if they have the power to stop it. Even if they planned for it, parliment would step in to forbide them.
Which means it's highly likely we're staying.
Would parliament have a majority to do that? Presumably even if it has the rights to compel the PM to pull the lever it would still need to pass legislation, which in practice needs government support, etc etc.
Hague seems to be saying this morning that without a working majority on this issue, Parliament can affectively stop the working of government completely by all sorts of parliamentary devices. MPs would/could block a No Deal.
It's a very surprising opinion from the Advocate-General. It could scarcely be less helpful for the government seeking to corral Remainers into their pen.
We'll have to wait and see whether it is followed by the CJEU.
It's a very surprising opinion from the Advocate-General. It could scarcely be less helpful for the government seeking to corral Remainers into their pen.
We'll have to wait and see whether it is followed by the CJEU.
I think it helps Mrs May with Leavers.
Back my deal or the House will vote to revoke A50.
I don't think Black Wednesday was self evidently the right thing to do.
With hindsight it had proved to be
At the time it was a balance between politics and economics with the politicians deciding in favour of politics
Yes, looking back our exit from the ERM was the firing of the starting gun on a decade and a half of unprecedented and uninterrupted economic growth.
It was difficult for a short while, as things adjusted to the new normal, but the U.K. is full of resourceful people who soon worked out how to benefit from the changed arrangements.
As is usual in British political commentary, that's very inward looking. At a minimum that rather ignores the impact of the marketisation and growth of the Chinese economy. To give an indication, in 1997 Hong Kong made up around 18% of Chinese GDP. It's around 4% now and it's not as if its shrunk.
Quite the opposite.
The EU is inward-looking, protectionist (especially in agriculture), and spends years or even decades negotiating trade deals that go into excruciating detail on design of widgets - yet almost completely ignore financial services, intellectual property and developing technologies.
It’s a big wide world out there, and it’s growing massively compared to what’s going on in Europe, where the last recession is still being recovered from and many places still have huge unemployment.
(Looks out of window 3,500 miles away and counts 72 cranes in less than perfect visibility - on a good day it’s probably over a hundred)
The opportunity is massive and we have one chance to take it. Yes there will be some adjustment needed, and probably some temporary government intervention required in certain areas, but IMO the chance of success is too big to turn down.
A successful U.K. outside the EU terrifies the EU more than almost anything else, hence the way the negotiations have been played. Sadly our political leaders and their risk-averse civil servants have been taken along for the ride.
I am currently in Shanghai. It's the last day of a two-day event my company has organised here. We got 450 delegates, 70% of them from Asia-Pacific countries. The EU has not prevented us from holding it and generating large sponsorship and delegate fees in any way, shape or form.
It's a very surprising opinion from the Advocate-General. It could scarcely be less helpful for the government seeking to corral Remainers into their pen.
We'll have to wait and see whether it is followed by the CJEU.
The EU27 will hate it, too.
Then let's see if they decide the backstop is not necessary after all, that's the best chance of us leaving now. But throwing Ireland under the bus like that, would they do it? They've been very insistent on that backstop.
Mr. Observer, disagree. The political class is pro-EU and it would take a hell of a lot for them to flirt with the possibility of the proletariat having wrong opinions again.
It's a very surprising opinion from the Advocate-General. It could scarcely be less helpful for the government seeking to corral Remainers into their pen.
We'll have to wait and see whether it is followed by the CJEU.
I think it helps Mrs May with Leavers.
Back my deal or the House will vote to revoke A50.
It's a very surprising opinion from the Advocate-General. It could scarcely be less helpful for the government seeking to corral Remainers into their pen.
We'll have to wait and see whether it is followed by the CJEU.
The EU27 will hate it, too.
Then let's see if they decide the backstop is not necessary after all, that's the best chance of us leaving now. But throwing Ireland under the bus like that, would they do it? They've been very insistent on that backstop.
They were insistent as they knew we would fold so they could insist. No other reason.
Initially it wasn't even there! It only got added in after they realised how week May was and they could get away with it.
The EU is inward-looking, protectionist (especially in agriculture), and spends years or even decades negotiating trade deals that go into excruciating detail on design of widgets - yet almost completely ignore financial services, intellectual property and developing technologies.
It's a very surprising opinion from the Advocate-General. It could scarcely be less helpful for the government seeking to corral Remainers into their pen.
We'll have to wait and see whether it is followed by the CJEU.
I think it helps Mrs May with Leavers.
Back my deal or the House will vote to revoke A50.
Not enough leavers to get the deal through the house. And labour are 1 step from being the remain party so will continue to say they want all options open not this deal. Any Tory switching would be admitting they fear remain would win if they don't agree. And Tory remainers, some, will vote against.
It's a very surprising opinion from the Advocate-General. It could scarcely be less helpful for the government seeking to corral Remainers into their pen.
We'll have to wait and see whether it is followed by the CJEU.
I think it helps Mrs May with Leavers.
Back my deal or the House will vote to revoke A50.
Presumably the EU will seek to amend A50 PDQ in light of this?
Would that require unanimity ?
And referendums in Ireland and Denmark, potentially???
But I don't see why they'd want to, as long as the "no fucking around" clause is in there to stop people revoking Article 50 when they intend to remain. It's not like the rest of the EU is massively jealous of the UK for the chance to take part in excruciating, all-consuming negotiations while the EU agencies relocate and the rest of the EU makes its decisions without them.
Ladbrokes: odds down just a smidge on another referendum (2.37 to 2.25, with no second referendum before the end of 2019 lengthening from 1.53 to 1.57).
Be interesting to see if weight of money causes a bigger shift.
Right now, you can get 4 and 4.5 on a second referendum Remain or Leave vote, respectively, but if the referendum's more complicated than that it could throw up potential problems.
Being out in name only, which is the reality of May’s deal, is meaningless and will please no one. All it will do is ensure Brexit continues to dominate politics, which seems inevitable now, rather than allowing us to get on with the rest of our lives. How could the Tories be so inept as to keep her as their leader.
Actually May's Deal leaves the EU and ends free movement. As Deltapoll showed voters prefer that head to head to Remain or No Deal.
If you really want Brexit in name only try permanent Single Market and Customs Union which may be what we end up with if the Deal is voted down or under PM Corbyn
Ladbrokes: odds down just a smidge on another referendum (2.37 to 2.25, with no second referendum before the end of 2019 lengthening from 1.53 to 1.57).
Be interesting to see if weight of money causes a bigger shift.
Right now, you can get 4 and 4.5 on a second referendum Remain or Leave vote, respectively, but if the referendum's more complicated than that it could throw up potential problems.
I'd put remain at 75% chance now. There's procedural issues to work out but unless 100 people change their minds on the deal the path has gotten much easier.
Ladbrokes: odds down just a smidge on another referendum (2.37 to 2.25, with no second referendum before the end of 2019 lengthening from 1.53 to 1.57).
Be interesting to see if weight of money causes a bigger shift.
Right now, you can get 4 and 4.5 on a second referendum Remain or Leave vote, respectively, but if the referendum's more complicated than that it could throw up potential problems.
I'd put remain at 75% chance now. There's procedural issues to work out but unless 100 people change their minds on the deal the path has gotten much easier.
There needs to be two changes in the law for Remain, how do you see that happening?
Comments
Edit/ fifth already...
Mr. Glenn, I'm enormously surprised by that ruling but it's got to put rocket-boosters under Remain MPs of various parties.
Edited extra bit: ah, does require full ruling though to become binding. But still helpful for Remainers in the Commons.
It was difficult for a short while, as things adjusted to the new normal, but the U.K. is full of resourceful people who soon worked out how to benefit from the changed arrangements.
Brexit has the potential to be the same, if only the politicians on all sides could see the opportunity staring them in the face and get behind leaving the EU. 90% of worldwide economic growth in the next decade is forecast to come from outside the EU.
*runs away*
Schengen (Shengen?) and eurozone opt-outs are in treaties and would remain, ahem, if we were to stay in, but not if we were to rejoin.
Back to to status quo ante Article 50.
I think this overstates the case a bit - they say they recommend 6 months, but they stress that it's not a legal requirement.
That said, I agree that it's getting too late for a referendum without an Article 50 extension. I think you can actually turn this on its head and say that it's an argument why TMay may have to agree to a referendum, even if she doesn't want to. If she wants to hang on to her job (seems in character), and she can't get her deal through parliament (it's looking a bit tricky) and the government hasn't done enough to prepare for No Deal (is hasn't) then she'll need the EU's permission to kick the can. And they'll only agree to that if there's something that might actually move things in a different direction: A general election (aargh) or a referendum.
Edit to add: ^ Post overtaken by events, apparently...
Brexit is dead. Remainers won't give up when they are so close and leavers won't unite behind anything to ensure it happens. As long as enough unite to stop no deal , brexit is now over and out.
Which means it's highly likely we're staying.
Perhaps “revoke, royal commission to work out how we do it better the second time, reinvoke”
Then have a second referendum: May or Boris's Deal.
Sorted.
If there's pressure to leave the EU again in the future, then we need to know exactly how we're doing it in the future. Not a leap into the dark.
I just hope there's a right-leaning sensible political party i can vote for after this, not a bunch of loons and fruitcases taking over the Tories
Look at last night’s ComRes, the voters are prepared to an economic hit for Brexit.
Plus UKIP, now that they have confirmed they are the BNP/EDL in blazers will riot.
Most MPs will worry about suffering the same fate as Jo Cox if they revoke Brexit.
https://twitter.com/davidallengreen/status/1069871927915933696
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/12/03/sorry-brexiteers-parliament-doesnt-want-no-deal-mps-will-kill/
*Innocent Face*
Remain or deal. I don't see the dup changing their minds and this ruling means no labour remainer rebels will, but maybe it'll sway a few previously against. Not enough though.
https://twitter.com/zackpolanski/status/1069641592909250561?s=21
Coughs *364 economists*
https://twitter.com/xtophercook/status/1069870056052535297?s=21
https://twitter.com/xtophercook/status/1069873061128744961?s=21
If you don't want parliament to ignore the big vote there is a deal to leave on the table, get on to your old Etonian pals to take it.
Time to for MPs to step up to the plate and stop this madness in its tracks.
"backstop, backstop, Ireland, i hate customs unions, my unicorn is shiny etc etc etc"
Nah, too implausible.
Goodbye brexit, you're done. I hope the ERG truly believe inadequate brexit was not worth it otherwise they will soon be crying about this.
The EU is inward-looking, protectionist (especially in agriculture), and spends years or even decades negotiating trade deals that go into excruciating detail on design of widgets - yet almost completely ignore financial services, intellectual property and developing technologies.
It’s a big wide world out there, and it’s growing massively compared to what’s going on in Europe, where the last recession is still being recovered from and many places still have huge unemployment.
(Looks out of window 3,500 miles away and counts 72 cranes in less than perfect visibility - on a good day it’s probably over a hundred)
The opportunity is massive and we have one chance to take it. Yes there will be some adjustment needed, and probably some temporary government intervention required in certain areas, but IMO the chance of success is too big to turn down.
A successful U.K. outside the EU terrifies the EU more than almost anything else, hence the way the negotiations have been played. Sadly our political leaders and their risk-averse civil servants have been taken along for the ride.
We'll have to wait and see whether it is followed by the CJEU.
I think not buy just checking
https://www.ft.com/content/6ab20026-f71c-11e8-8b7c-6fa24bd5409c
I've honestly tried to put my best unbiased probabilities on this. The result is:
May's deal goes through 47% (made up of 20% passed first time, 16% passed second time after a tweak with the EU, 15% as a result of a second referendum - probability 36% of this happening).
Norway+ deal 15% (as a result of parliament successfully getting an A50 extension and going for this option rather than a second referendum)
No Brexit 22% (as a result of defeat of May's deal at first or second attempt 64% X UK asks for A50 extension 80% X Parliament agrees 2nd referendum 70% X No Brexit wins 60%)
No Deal 16% (made up of 13% Parliament opts for a managed no deal plus 3% as a result of a second referendum)
The probability of May's deal going through at first or second attempt in time for 29 March is 36%. If it doesn't go through, there is a 13% chance of a no deal - probably with a small extension for mini agreement to lesson the blow and a 51% chance of an agreed extension to A50.
So I think the chances of the UK leaving the EU on 29th March are surely less than 54%. I certainly wouldn't bet on it.
Back my deal or the House will vote to revoke A50.
And it does make a second referendum actually doable within the timeframe (though not overwhelmingly likely).
Initially it wasn't even there! It only got added in after they realised how week May was and they could get away with it.
Should we revoke Article 50?
Yes
No
http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2018/august/tradoc_157228.pdf#page=361
Also not seeing the excruciating widget design details in there, maybe they're included by a reference to some other agreement or something???
So the deal still isn't happening.
He prefers a Corbyn government if Mrs May doesn’t deliver the precise Brexit Lilico wants.
But I don't see why they'd want to, as long as the "no fucking around" clause is in there to stop people revoking Article 50 when they intend to remain. It's not like the rest of the EU is massively jealous of the UK for the chance to take part in excruciating, all-consuming negotiations while the EU agencies relocate and the rest of the EU makes its decisions without them.
Be interesting to see if weight of money causes a bigger shift.
Right now, you can get 4 and 4.5 on a second referendum Remain or Leave vote, respectively, but if the referendum's more complicated than that it could throw up potential problems.
If you really want Brexit in name only try permanent Single Market and Customs Union which may be what we end up with if the Deal is voted down or under PM Corbyn