Interesting Mark Stone of Sky reports there is no chance that the deal will be changed but the EU will pivot to Norway which of course includes free movement
Nicky Morgan on radio 5 live this morning says she will vote for TM deal but if it falls she will back Norway but opposes a second referendum
The direction of travel is Norway
But, let's say you have a majority in the house for "norway" and the EU offers it. How does it get agreed. May surely can't endorse it, not ending FOM is fatal to her.
Which was pretty clear from her reply yesterday. I don’t expect it to add a great deal to the AG’s statement - though Labour will pretend it is a bombshell.
Given that the assumed “killer” information is that the U.K. will potentially be trapped in a customs union, won’t Labour have to explain why their policy - the U.K. actually being “trapped” in a customs union, is such a great improvement?
Of course not, silly me.
We're fine with being in a custgoms union. We're fine with the Irish situation remaining as it is now. It is ONLY the ultra-Brexiteers who dislike it, because they believe there are great trade deals to be had outside. Many of us actively dislike the idea of a US trade deal, with the almost inevitable decline in food standards that would be necessary to get it agreed.
So you object to the deal because it might allow us to leave the customs union with EU agreement? Even though that was actually your policy at the last election?
The Fixed Term Parliament Act is looking more stupid than ever today.
What's the problem? Jeremy Corbyn says he wants a General Election, so if TMay wants one too there's nothing to stop her asking Parliament to vote for one.
She would be just about the only person in the Tory party who would want one now. So, she can't make a decision that it is in the national interest to have a GE.
It's not at all obvious that most of the parliamentary Conservative party would defy the whip; The polling isn't too bad, the Tories don't have a majority and they'd look terrible doing it.
Mr. Eagles, the swastika was used through history, perhaps most notably by Hindus, but appropriated by the Nazis. If I had a swastika banner, do you think people would associate that with me being a Hindu [for the record, I'm not], or being a Nazi?
Likewise, People's X, Y and Z sounds far more Soviet than it does a 1909-10 Budget.
Or, for that matter, Hitler getting cultural dominance of the toothbrush moustache, when Chaplin had it first.
Criticisms of it on the basis that the first vote also included people are fair enough so it is merely another referendum not something special.
I don't think many people would make the soviet association and assuming it doesn't bother people on that basis does it really matter?
In fairness to people's vote, my understanding is the name came partially from polling showing that people making a decision on the final deal polled more popularly than a second referendum.
Forcing Foxy to type #PeopleMakingADecisionOnTheFinalDealVote would be inhumane (or animal cruelty) so people's vote was chosen as a shorter option.
I have no problem with complaints regarding the first vote also being a vote of people but they chose it for the reason that it is more popular. All political causes would do the same. Pretending the peoplesvote is some kind of unique spin/branding/pr in politics is silly, it is not unique in its slight deceptions.
Brexit is effectively about the Vassal State. Are Leavers willing to take "May's Deal" and commit to doing what we are told by the EU without any real say or influence? If yes, Brexit goes ahead. If no, it probably won't. Remainers are irrelevant to this. They will vote the same way in any second referendum. This is entirely a Leaver fight.
I wouldn't bank on it. There are plenty of intelligent Remainers who are not happy with the question being asked again. There have been a couple posting on here and I know of a fair few more. They may not all vote for Leave this time but plenty will abstain on principle. How many will be as important as what Leave voters do.
My theory is that most Leavers aren't bothered about the Vassal State. They are interested in the symbols of sovereignty and not the exercise of it. They don't want to make trade offs, which is what sovereignty actually means.
The "vassal state" thing is simply a smear that doesn't reflect the actual deal. The rule making areas vastly outstrip the rule taking ones (purely limited to some goods areas, less than a fifth of the economy). The other four fifths of the economy and the non economic stuff we get full control over.
I accept "vassal state" is a pejorative term and we need a neutral shorthand for a cross the board commitment to implement rules that we have had no say and little influence over. It's true the WA/Political Statement only require the UK to maintain previously adopted rules after the end of the transition in certain areas including industrial, food safety and environmental policy, employment legislation and customs rules, although these may have been imposed during the transition on VS terms. It's not committed at this stage to implement subsequent EU regulation.
However the vast bulk of the arrangements are still to be negotiated. The EU runs a system. It won't accept an ex member who isn't bound by the whole system to have any direction over it. There's a lot more no say rule taking to come.
I now expect the Remainer MPs, who form the majority, to propose a 2nd referendum, which on the basis of the evidence that you have publicised, will lead to the cancellation of Brexit.
Yes I think this is now the most likely outcome.
There is no Commons majoritynfor any exit deal, "Norway" included, and no deal is not an option.
So a second referendum it will be and Article 50 will be revoked.
Yep. Very good timing from the advocate general too. Continuity remainers would be silly to give up now and even if nearly all the ERG backed the deal some more remainers are needed.
How long before labour back remain? They aren't going to take no stance in a referendum as 90% of them will campaign for remain.
According to Laura Kuenssberg yesterday there is a majority in Parliament for Single Market and Customs Union Brexit but not for EUref2 as it stands, to get a majority for the latter it would likely need to be a 3 way Remain, Deal, No Deal referendum
Single market and customs union Brexit requires passing the deal. It is something that can only come about via the trade negotiations - ie. at best is a matter for the (non binding) political declaration.
And it would require seriously hard negotiation to get there - the EU aren’t going to offer up permanent Single market access on a plate.
Agreed, MPs may well end up in the absurd situation where they reject May's Deal but end up having to cave in even more to the EU to get a new Deal as a result
And they shall call it a triumph.
The problem is you have Labour and the ERG who would have rejected any deal that May bought back. The ERG as their "dream" Brexit can never be achieved and Labour because they are the opposition. None of what is going on in Parliament at the moment is in the national interest at all and because of it we will end up with a far worse deal than May's deal. But as you point out Labour will call it a triumph and Im sure Nick Palmer will gloat on here about what a great deal his messiah has fought for.
I just wonder how much is going to happen simultaneously after the vote next week. A government VoNC, a pivot,, and a party VoNC all kicking off at the same.time and racing against one another specifically so the faster processes can inform the slower ones (or not) would be a fearful sight to behold.
Isn't that just a Lab-SNP Coalition (or confidence-and-supply)? 284+42=326, an absolute majority of 2 and an effective majority of 7-10 depending on number of Sinn Fein MPs
The fact that polling shows that people believe “with hindsight” it was a mistake to (vote to?) leave the EU, doesn’t mean that a new vote to remain or leave would reverse the decision. Many believe that the path has been chosen, for good or bad, and we’re stuck with it.
Comments
Wrong to vote to leave. 49
Right to vote to leave. 38
An important distinction.
The government makes treaties not parliament.
I don't think many people would make the soviet association and assuming it doesn't bother people on that basis does it really matter?
In fairness to people's vote, my understanding is the name came partially from polling showing that people making a decision on the final deal polled more popularly than a second referendum.
Forcing Foxy to type #PeopleMakingADecisionOnTheFinalDealVote would be inhumane (or animal cruelty) so people's vote was chosen as a shorter option.
I have no problem with complaints regarding the first vote also being a vote of people but they chose it for the reason that it is more popular. All political causes would do the same. Pretending the peoplesvote is some kind of unique spin/branding/pr in politics is silly, it is not unique in its slight deceptions.
However the vast bulk of the arrangements are still to be negotiated. The EU runs a system. It won't accept an ex member who isn't bound by the whole system to have any direction over it. There's a lot more no say rule taking to come.
NEW THREAD
She is literally playing a game of, maybe something will turn up.
Except, she will lose heavily.
Our future depends on the complex interaction of decisions taken by Gove, Javid, Corbyn, Grieve, and Dodds in the hours after the vote goes down.
284+42=326, an absolute majority of 2 and an effective majority of 7-10 depending on number of Sinn Fein MPs
They really think MPs are going to sit there and say , fine we’ll crash out even though we’ve instructed you to change course .