politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Nunc dimittis: Theresa May’s exit approaches

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Nunc dimittis: Theresa May’s exit approaches

“Sovereign Lord, as you have promised, you may now dismiss your servant in peace.”

Read the full story here

El_Capitano

I would have expected proper BCP, and as the daughter of a clergyman, so would Theresa May:

"Lord, now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace"

So much of the finest English choral music begins with those words, including the beautiful Philip Moore setting I accompanied on Sunday. (And as for the Howells Gloucester Service...)

But more appropriate is that it goes on:

"For mine eyes have seen thy salvation"

Salvation for the PM looks a long, long way off right now.

(Good piece, Alastair.)

TheScreamingEagles

Top piece as usual Alastair.

RobD

Thanks for the header Alastair.

Scott_P

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1070696110224752640

TGOHF

" I expect her to resign, very possibly calling for a referendum as her last duty as Prime Minister. "

That would be an apt end to her reign of piss.

Any Con leader that proposes a referendum should be forced to drink a pint of it.

grabcocque

Mayxit *means* Mayxit.

david_herdson

I see the Lib Dems have lost more than 8% of their MPs today.

https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1070682796488835072

grabcocque

Can we talk for a second about Theresa May's arms?

RobD

grabcocque said:

Can we talk for a second about Theresa May's arms?

That’s gotta be a photoshop

TheScreamingEagles

grabcocque said:

Can we talk for a second about Theresa May's arms?

She's the daughter of Reed Richards.

Sean_F

O/T I see President Macron's approval rating is now down to 18%.

Trump's rating is stellar by comparison (as is May's).

tpfkar

Good piece. BUT - if the Benn amendment squeaks through, May loses by 10 or so votes, as it'll be Opposition + Tory Remainers vs Government + ERG + DUP + Stephen Lloyd.

So it's not a crushing defeat and she goes back to Brussels saying how close she is and asking for help on the backstop.

When a straight vote would have gone down by 80-100.

That's why I think the Benn amendment is a lifeline for May; it could keep her in her job over Christmas, along the theme of the article. Would be smarter for it to be withdrawn - very late.

williamglenn

https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1070698507034611714

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Eagles, or Inspector Gadget.

Polruan

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Eagles, cheers, I'll give them a quick look.

I, for one, am shocked and appalled to hear the Normans did horrendous things in Yorkshire.

Mr. Polruan, pooled sovereignty is a nonsensical term. Believing the EU is good for the UK is a perfectly valid belief, but pretending we haven't given away rights to determine our own destiny through politicians elected by and accountable to the British public by surrendering vetoes is a sentiment not in accordance with the power of reason.

We’ve given away rights to act unilaterally in exchange for rights to influence (in some cases veto) multilateral actions. I’m sure that you could define metrics to show that as a net loss or gain of power depending on how you value different kinds of power.

david_herdson

"A fifth Conservative Prime Minister in a row would see her premiership destroyed over the subject of the EU."

Point of order. 'Only' four, tops. I'll give you Cameron and, prospectively, May.

Major, while Europe played a major role in his downfall - both the ERM and the Maastricht divisions, was brought down in the end as much by the desire for a change, a credible Labour alternative, and the continual sleaze stories. But Europe was a part.

Likewise, we can say that Thatcher was brought down by Europe, and on a proximate basis, that certainly played a major part in Howe's critique, but poll ratings and above all, the Poll Tax, were at least as important.

But I don't see where you get five from. Heath was brought down by his failure to either effectively confront the unions or to work with them, as well as the economic situation. The Tory Party might have suffered some division over EEC entry but it was not intrinsic to the early election or to Heath's failure to win it.

AlastairMeeks

david_herdson said:

"A fifth Conservative Prime Minister in a row would see her premiership destroyed over the subject of the EU."

Point of order. 'Only' four, tops. I'll give you Cameron and, prospectively, May.

Major, while Europe played a major role in his downfall - both the ERM and the Maastricht divisions, was brought down in the end as much by the desire for a change, a credible Labour alternative, and the continual sleaze stories. But Europe was a part.

Likewise, we can say that Thatcher was brought down by Europe, and on a proximate basis, that certainly played a major part in Howe's critique, but poll ratings and above all, the Poll Tax, were at least as important.

But I don't see where you get five from. Heath was brought down by his failure to either effectively confront the unions or to work with them, as well as the economic situation. The Tory Party might have suffered some division over EEC entry but it was not intrinsic to the early election or to Heath's failure to win it.

I'm a lawyer. I can't count.

OldKingCole

david_herdson said:

I see the Lib Dems have lost more than 8% of their MPs today.

https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1070682796488835072

There must be more 'Ind something' Members in the current House than for many, many years.

RobD

AlastairMeeks said:

david_herdson said:

"A fifth Conservative Prime Minister in a row would see her premiership destroyed over the subject of the EU."

Point of order. 'Only' four, tops. I'll give you Cameron and, prospectively, May.

Major, while Europe played a major role in his downfall - both the ERM and the Maastricht divisions, was brought down in the end as much by the desire for a change, a credible Labour alternative, and the continual sleaze stories. But Europe was a part.

Likewise, we can say that Thatcher was brought down by Europe, and on a proximate basis, that certainly played a major part in Howe's critique, but poll ratings and above all, the Poll Tax, were at least as important.

But I don't see where you get five from. Heath was brought down by his failure to either effectively confront the unions or to work with them, as well as the economic situation. The Tory Party might have suffered some division over EEC entry but it was not intrinsic to the early election or to Heath's failure to win it.

I'm a lawyer. I can't count.

Confirmed fake news? Sad.

Tissue_Price

AlastairMeeks said:

david_herdson said:

"A fifth Conservative Prime Minister in a row would see her premiership destroyed over the subject of the EU."

Point of order. 'Only' four, tops. I'll give you Cameron and, prospectively, May.

Major, while Europe played a major role in his downfall - both the ERM and the Maastricht divisions, was brought down in the end as much by the desire for a change, a credible Labour alternative, and the continual sleaze stories. But Europe was a part.

Likewise, we can say that Thatcher was brought down by Europe, and on a proximate basis, that certainly played a major part in Howe's critique, but poll ratings and above all, the Poll Tax, were at least as important.

But I don't see where you get five from. Heath was brought down by his failure to either effectively confront the unions or to work with them, as well as the economic situation. The Tory Party might have suffered some division over EEC entry but it was not intrinsic to the early election or to Heath's failure to win it.

I'm a lawyer. I can't count.

Don't worry, many politicians can't either:
https://twitter.com/labourwhips/status/1070687054307225600

Tissue_Price

OldKingCole said:

david_herdson said:

I see the Lib Dems have lost more than 8% of their MPs today.

https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1070682796488835072

There must be more 'Ind something' Members in the current House than for many, many years.

We've only just started on that.

Richard_Nabavi

I agree with Alastair.

Mrs May will have done her duty, and remarkably well in the awful circumstances. She has come back with a decent implementation of Brexit, which is as good as anyone could have got. It reflects the letter and spirit of the referendum result. Although much detail remains to be filled in, it looks as though it would achieve this without causing too much economic damage. She has even managed to get the EU to back down on one of their sacred 'four freedoms'.

But there's a fatal flaw: she hasn't brought MPs along with her. Maybe it would always have been impossible to do so, given the catastrophic GE2017 result, but she hasn't helped herself by her remote and inflexible style.

Nonetheless she comes out of this with enormous credit for her determination and resilience. Whatever comes next will be even more chaotic, but it will no longer be her problem.

In practice, I can't see any alternative now to asking for an Article 50 extension, and probably a referendum to decide between Revoke and the Deal, which would have the great merit that either result would be workable. The obstacles to getting there, legal and political, are horrendous, but does anyone else have any better idea?

RobC

williamglenn said:

https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1070698507034611714

People need to get out more. Try being a Liberal Democrat.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Polruan, there's no veto right in areas now subject to QMV.

And why should we wish to have undue influence in foreign nations? I have no desire for our government to able to meddle in Slovenian politics, nor for Slovenians to be able to hold sway over UK political decisions.

Mr. Price, expecting numeracy from a party led by a socialist is optimistic.

Verulamius

El_Capitano said:

I would have expected proper BCP, and as the daughter of a clergyman, so would Theresa May:

"Lord, now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace"

So much of the finest English choral music begins with those words, including the beautiful Philip Moore setting I accompanied on Sunday. (And as for the Howells Gloucester Service...)

But more appropriate is that it goes on:

"For mine eyes have seen thy salvation"

Salvation for the PM looks a long, long way off right now.

(Good piece, Alastair.)

For those looking for a time and a place for reflection https://www.choralevensong.org/uk/home.php is a good site to help find your nearest choral evensong.

TheScreamingEagles

AlastairMeeks said:

david_herdson said:

"A fifth Conservative Prime Minister in a row would see her premiership destroyed over the subject of the EU."

Point of order. 'Only' four, tops. I'll give you Cameron and, prospectively, May.

Major, while Europe played a major role in his downfall - both the ERM and the Maastricht divisions, was brought down in the end as much by the desire for a change, a credible Labour alternative, and the continual sleaze stories. But Europe was a part.

Likewise, we can say that Thatcher was brought down by Europe, and on a proximate basis, that certainly played a major part in Howe's critique, but poll ratings and above all, the Poll Tax, were at least as important.

But I don't see where you get five from. Heath was brought down by his failure to either effectively confront the unions or to work with them, as well as the economic situation. The Tory Party might have suffered some division over EEC entry but it was not intrinsic to the early election or to Heath's failure to win it.

I'm a lawyer. I can't count.

Sack PB's sub editor.

tpfkar

Tissue_Price said:

AlastairMeeks said:

david_herdson said:

"A fifth Conservative Prime Minister in a row would see her premiership destroyed over the subject of the EU."

Point of order. 'Only' four, tops. I'll give you Cameron and, prospectively, May.

Major, while Europe played a major role in his downfall - both the ERM and the Maastricht divisions, was brought down in the end as much by the desire for a change, a credible Labour alternative, and the continual sleaze stories. But Europe was a part.

Likewise, we can say that Thatcher was brought down by Europe, and on a proximate basis, that certainly played a major part in Howe's critique, but poll ratings and above all, the Poll Tax, were at least as important.

But I don't see where you get five from. Heath was brought down by his failure to either effectively confront the unions or to work with them, as well as the economic situation. The Tory Party might have suffered some division over EEC entry but it was not intrinsic to the early election or to Heath's failure to win it.

I'm a lawyer. I can't count.

Don't worry, many politicians can't either:
https://twitter.com/labourwhips/status/1070687054307225600

Let's not get started on their grammar either...

OldKingCole

Tissue_Price said:

OldKingCole said:

david_herdson said:

I see the Lib Dems have lost more than 8% of their MPs today.

https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1070682796488835072

There must be more 'Ind something' Members in the current House than for many, many years.

We've only just started on that.

I suspect you are right.

williamglenn

https://twitter.com/nicholaswatt/status/1070701585578233857

Scott_P

SNIP

Sean_F

OldKingCole said:

Tissue_Price said:

OldKingCole said:

david_herdson said:

I see the Lib Dems have lost more than 8% of their MPs today.

https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1070682796488835072

There must be more 'Ind something' Members in the current House than for many, many years.

We've only just started on that.

I suspect you are right.

I think we're now up to nine independents

TheScreamingEagles

williamglenn said:

https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1070698507034611714

If only someone had warned that person

TOPPING

Good article. She isn't going to resign, however, as the only option is her deal. It's not like Dave in June 2016 leaving it to someone else to negotiate the deal because as you say, there is no time for a new prospectus from the Cons.

The only option is that if the deal fails, and I continue to believe that it won't, then she goes back again the following week with something that would look and sound like a compromise but would likely be a kick into the medium-length grass. Something like an "endeavour to revisit the backstop..." type clause which will buy off the rebels.

Put simply, it is her deal or no deal and it is not going to be no deal.

williamglenn

TOPPING said:

Good article. She isn't going to resign, however, as the only option is her deal. It's not like Dave in June 2016 leaving it to someone else to negotiate the deal because as you say, there is no time for a new prospectus from the Cons.

The only option is that if the deal fails, and I continue to believe that it won't, then she goes back again the following week with something that would look and sound like a compromise but would likely be a kick into the medium-length grass. Something like an "endeavour to revisit the backstop..." type clause which will buy off the rebels.

Put simply, it is her deal or no deal and it is not going to be no deal.

You're forgetting your own usual logic. Why would Labour vote for it?

There isn't going to be any deal acceptable to the DUP, and even in the best case scenario for the government there will be Tory rebels.

Richard_Tyndall

TheScreamingEagles said:

williamglenn said:

https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1070698507034611714

If only someone had warned that person

We did. We told them it would only work with someone who understood and believed in Brexit in charge.

david_herdson

AlastairMeeks said:

david_herdson said:

"A fifth Conservative Prime Minister in a row would see her premiership destroyed over the subject of the EU."

Point of order. 'Only' four, tops. I'll give you Cameron and, prospectively, May.

Major, while Europe played a major role in his downfall - both the ERM and the Maastricht divisions, was brought down in the end as much by the desire for a change, a credible Labour alternative, and the continual sleaze stories. But Europe was a part.

Likewise, we can say that Thatcher was brought down by Europe, and on a proximate basis, that certainly played a major part in Howe's critique, but poll ratings and above all, the Poll Tax, were at least as important.

But I don't see where you get five from. Heath was brought down by his failure to either effectively confront the unions or to work with them, as well as the economic situation. The Tory Party might have suffered some division over EEC entry but it was not intrinsic to the early election or to Heath's failure to win it.

I'm a lawyer. I can't count.

OK. I'll accept that

Philip_Thompson

Can I please ask a question for any leavers who believe the backstop is a price worth paying to ensure Brexit ... of whom there are a few here, Casino, Sean F and Richard T I believe ... would you say that still if instead of being for Northern Ireland it instead applied to England and Scotland?

If we were being told that upon exit England and Scotland would still in perpetuity be subjected to EU regulations, would in perpetuity be stuck in the customs area . . . And that we would have no MEPs etc to change that and we could never unilaterally end this arrangement, it would take EU permission to change anything and that might never come ...

... if the backstop applies to us would you still think it was a price worth paying?

TOPPING

williamglenn said:

TOPPING said:

Good article. She isn't going to resign, however, as the only option is her deal. It's not like Dave in June 2016 leaving it to someone else to negotiate the deal because as you say, there is no time for a new prospectus from the Cons.

The only option is that if the deal fails, and I continue to believe that it won't, then she goes back again the following week with something that would look and sound like a compromise but would likely be a kick into the medium-length grass. Something like an "endeavour to revisit the backstop..." type clause which will buy off the rebels.

Put simply, it is her deal or no deal and it is not going to be no deal.

You're forgetting your own usual logic. Why would Labour vote for it?

There isn't going to be any deal acceptable to the DUP, and even in the best case scenario for the government there will be Tory rebels.

Well somehow I am thinking that the Cons will come round. If not on first vote, then on second.

I am expecting a max (as per NPXMP's estimate) of six Lab MPs to vote with the govt. Plus we have that LD now so that's a start.

logical_song

Completely Off Topic
Why are new car sales dropping - these guys have an opinion. They're right about my motives, but overall - I dunno. I'd be interested to hear from RCS on this.
"The Impending Big Auto/Oil Implosion Explained | In Depth"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUC6lsLr04I

williamglenn

"UKIP has betrayed its members, Brexiteers and the British people."

https://twitter.com/NathanGillMEP/status/1070681908152074240

Scott_P

Richard_Tyndall said:

We did. We told them it would only work with someone who understood and believed in Brexit in charge.

Another unicorn

Theresa May demonstrates more understanding of Brexit than any one of the Brexiteers

rcs1000

Sean_F said:

O/T I see President Macron's approval rating is now down to 18%.

Trump's rating is stellar by comparison (as is May's).

To be fair, they've both lost about the same number of percentage points of support since their election. People forget that Macron only got about 25% in the first round

TGOHF

Sean_F said:

O/T I see President Macron's approval rating is now down to 18%.

Trump's rating is stellar by comparison (as is May's).

Blame the Anglo-Saxon media I suppose

https://twitter.com/JeremyCliffe/status/1062697952752349184

Tissue_Price

williamglenn said:

TOPPING said:

Good article. She isn't going to resign, however, as the only option is her deal. It's not like Dave in June 2016 leaving it to someone else to negotiate the deal because as you say, there is no time for a new prospectus from the Cons.

The only option is that if the deal fails, and I continue to believe that it won't, then she goes back again the following week with something that would look and sound like a compromise but would likely be a kick into the medium-length grass. Something like an "endeavour to revisit the backstop..." type clause which will buy off the rebels.

Put simply, it is her deal or no deal and it is not going to be no deal.

You're forgetting your own usual logic. Why would Labour vote for it?

There isn't going to be any deal acceptable to the DUP, and even in the best case scenario for the government there will be Tory rebels.

Labour might abstain at the price of a general election, ideally post-March 29th. Seek to "win the peace" and all that. Quite how that bargain could be struck is beyond me at the moment (obviously there is a NoCon route to one).

grabcocque

TOPPING said:

Well somehow I am thinking that the Cons will come round. If not on first vote, then on second.

Once more for those at the back:

The passing of the Grieve amendment has permanently stripped May of any opportunity to ask Parliament to vote again. Whatever Plan B she wants is now irrelevant, because Parliament will salami-slice and amend it into whatever they want.

May has one *and only one* chance to prevent Parliament from Taking Back Control, and that's win the Meaningful Vote.

And may god have mercy on her soul.

david_herdson

OldKingCole said:

david_herdson said:

I see the Lib Dems have lost more than 8% of their MPs today.

https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1070682796488835072

There must be more 'Ind something' Members in the current House than for many, many years.

I think the 2005-2010 parliament reached ten by the end?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_British_politicians_who_have_crossed_the_floor#2005–2010_Parliament

Richard_Tyndall

Scott_P said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

We did. We told them it would only work with someone who understood and believed in Brexit in charge.

Another unicorn

Theresa May demonstrates more understanding of Brexit than any one of the Brexiteers

Rubbish. She understands Brexit as well as you do and to be frank I often wonder how you manage to tie your own shoelaces in the morning.

Alanbrooke

TGOHF said:

Sean_F said:

O/T I see President Macron's approval rating is now down to 18%.

Trump's rating is stellar by comparison (as is May's).

Blame the Anglo-Saxon media I suppose

https://twitter.com/JeremyCliffe/status/1062697952752349184

given hes reversing all his reforms he hasnt changed anything

Pulpstar

williamglenn said:

https://twitter.com/nicholaswatt/status/1070701585578233857

He's got a huge stack of "Do not open till the meaningful vote" letters hasn't he

david_herdson

rcs1000 said:

Sean_F said:

O/T I see President Macron's approval rating is now down to 18%.

Trump's rating is stellar by comparison (as is May's).

To be fair, they've both lost about the same number of percentage points of support since their election. People forget that Macron only got about 25% in the first round

Apples and pears. The report suggested that Macron would currently win well over his current approval rating in a first round election because although many French don't approve of him, they dislike the alternatives even more.

Sean_F

Philip_Thompson said:

Can I please ask a question for any leavers who believe the backstop is a price worth paying to ensure Brexit ... of whom there are a few here, Casino, Sean F and Richard T I believe ... would you say that still if instead of being for Northern Ireland it instead applied to England and Scotland?

If we were being told that upon exit England and Scotland would still in perpetuity be subjected to EU regulations, would in perpetuity be stuck in the customs area . . . And that we would have no MEPs etc to change that and we could never unilaterally end this arrangement, it would take EU permission to change anything and that might never come ...

... if the backstop applies to us would you still think it was a price worth paying?

If at the same time, we were making no financial contributions to the EU, and were exempt from FOM, I would accept that the backstop was mutually uncomfortable, and that each side had good reason to compromise in future negotiations.

TrèsDifficile

FPT

grabcocque said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

TGOHF said:

Is Brexit over yet ?

Brexit is postponed until Liam Fox comes up with all those brand spanking new trade deals.

I've been to the year 3000
Not much has changed but they live under water
And Liam Fox's trade deal with the US is nearing completion.

Will Turkey have had joined the EU yet?

williamglenn

Tissue_Price said:

williamglenn said:

TOPPING said:

Good article. She isn't going to resign, however, as the only option is her deal. It's not like Dave in June 2016 leaving it to someone else to negotiate the deal because as you say, there is no time for a new prospectus from the Cons.

The only option is that if the deal fails, and I continue to believe that it won't, then she goes back again the following week with something that would look and sound like a compromise but would likely be a kick into the medium-length grass. Something like an "endeavour to revisit the backstop..." type clause which will buy off the rebels.

Put simply, it is her deal or no deal and it is not going to be no deal.

You're forgetting your own usual logic. Why would Labour vote for it?

There isn't going to be any deal acceptable to the DUP, and even in the best case scenario for the government there will be Tory rebels.

Labour might abstain at the price of a general election, ideally post-March 29th. Seek to "win the peace" and all that. Quite how that bargain could be struck is beyond me at the moment (obviously there is a NoCon route to one).

That would mean Labour would own this, betray their members and then even if they win the GE they’ll be consumed by further Brexit negotiations.

Pulpstar

I agree with the sentiment but if she can just remain in charge of the Tories till the 31st, ideally whilst installing Lidington as temporary PM I'd be grateful

Big_G_NorthWales

grabcocque said:

TOPPING said:

Well somehow I am thinking that the Cons will come round. If not on first vote, then on second.

Once more for those at the back:

The passing of the Grieve amendment has permanently stripped May of any opportunity to ask Parliament to vote again. Whatever Plan B she wants is now irrelevant, because Parliament will salami-slice and amend it into whatever they want.

May has one *and only one* chance to prevent Parliament from Taking Back Control, and that's win the Meaningful Vote.

And may god have mercy on her soul.

Everything is up in the air even whether the vote will take place but while I accept TM may well resign, she will not resign offering a referendum.

The move in public opinion seems to be hardening against the EU and certainly another referendum does not seem at all certain

Maybe a taste of no deal but the UK and EU markets are tanking this afternoon

Richard_Nabavi

williamglenn said:

Tissue_Price said:

williamglenn said:

TOPPING said:

Good article. She isn't going to resign, however, as the only option is her deal. It's not like Dave in June 2016 leaving it to someone else to negotiate the deal because as you say, there is no time for a new prospectus from the Cons.

The only option is that if the deal fails, and I continue to believe that it won't, then she goes back again the following week with something that would look and sound like a compromise but would likely be a kick into the medium-length grass. Something like an "endeavour to revisit the backstop..." type clause which will buy off the rebels.

Put simply, it is her deal or no deal and it is not going to be no deal.

You're forgetting your own usual logic. Why would Labour vote for it?

There isn't going to be any deal acceptable to the DUP, and even in the best case scenario for the government there will be Tory rebels.

Labour might abstain at the price of a general election, ideally post-March 29th. Seek to "win the peace" and all that. Quite how that bargain could be struck is beyond me at the moment (obviously there is a NoCon route to one).

That would mean Labour would own this, betray their members and then even if they win the GE they’ll be consumed by further Brexit negotiations.

Haven't they got those problems whatever they do?

Polruan

Excellent header - but I think you *are* being too charitable. It’s been obvious for months that May couldn’t deliver Brexit due to rebellious factions within her own party and her minority position in the Commons. If she had put the national interest ahead of her own position, she would either have faced down the ERG sooner, sought to trigger another GE in the hope of returning a Commons that could govern, or pursued formal cooperation with other parties. Or failing that, agreed this deal on schedule 6 months ago so there was more time to work out what happens next.

tottenhamWC

Richard_Nabavi said:

I agree with Alastair.

Mrs May will have done her duty, and remarkably well in the awful circumstances. She has come back with a decent implementation of Brexit, which is as good as anyone could have got. It reflects the letter and spirit of the referendum result. Although much detail remains to be filled in, it looks as though it would achieve this without causing too much economic damage. She has even managed to get the EU to back down on one of their sacred 'four freedoms'.

But there's a fatal flaw: she hasn't brought MPs along with her. Maybe it would always have been impossible to do so, given the catastrophic GE2017 result, but she hasn't helped herself by her remote and inflexible style.

Nonetheless she comes out of this with enormous credit for her determination and resilience. Whatever comes next will be even more chaotic, but it will no longer be her problem.

In practice, I can't see any alternative now to asking for an Article 50 extension, and probably a referendum to decide between Revoke and the Deal, which would have the great merit that either result would be workable. The obstacles to getting there, legal and political, are horrendous, but does anyone else have any better idea?

+1

Fenman

tpfkar said:

Tissue_Price said:

AlastairMeeks said:

david_herdson said:

"A fifth Conservative Prime Minister in a row would see her premiership destroyed over the subject of the EU."

Point of order. 'Only' four, tops. I'll give you Cameron and, prospectively, May.

Major, while Europe played a major role in his downfall - both the ERM and the Maastricht divisions, was brought down in the end as much by the desire for a change, a credible Labour alternative, and the continual sleaze stories. But Europe was a part.

Likewise, we can say that Thatcher was brought down by Europe, and on a proximate basis, that certainly played a major part in Howe's critique, but poll ratings and above all, the Poll Tax, were at least as important.

But I don't see where you get five from. Heath was brought down by his failure to either effectively confront the unions or to work with them, as well as the economic situation. The Tory Party might have suffered some division over EEC entry but it was not intrinsic to the early election or to Heath's failure to win it.

I'm a lawyer. I can't count.

Don't worry, many politicians can't either:
https://twitter.com/labourwhips/status/1070687054307225600

Let's not get started on their grammar either...

A prat. Hope someone stands against him as an independent Liberal next time.

Luckyguy1983

Pulpstar said:

williamglenn said:

https://twitter.com/nicholaswatt/status/1070701585578233857

He's got a huge stack of "Do not open till the meaningful vote" letters hasn't he

I assume he's speaking in his individual capacity as a backbencher rather than as Chairman of the 1922 committee.

Sean_F

david_herdson said:

rcs1000 said:

Sean_F said:

O/T I see President Macron's approval rating is now down to 18%.

Trump's rating is stellar by comparison (as is May's).

To be fair, they've both lost about the same number of percentage points of support since their election. People forget that Macron only got about 25% in the first round

Apples and pears. The report suggested that Macron would currently win well over his current approval rating in a first round election because although many French don't approve of him, they dislike the alternatives even more.

If he follows the same trajectory as Hollande he'll be down to single figures before long.

OldKingCole

david_herdson said:

OldKingCole said:

david_herdson said:

I see the Lib Dems have lost more than 8% of their MPs today.

https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1070682796488835072

There must be more 'Ind something' Members in the current House than for many, many years.

I think the 2005-2010 parliament reached ten by the end?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_British_politicians_who_have_crossed_the_floor#2005–2010_Parliament

I make it 11, plus Bob Spink doing it on two more occassions.

Tissue_Price

williamglenn said:

Tissue_Price said:

williamglenn said:

TOPPING said:

Good article. She isn't going to resign, however, as the only option is her deal. It's not like Dave in June 2016 leaving it to someone else to negotiate the deal because as you say, there is no time for a new prospectus from the Cons.

The only option is that if the deal fails, and I continue to believe that it won't, then she goes back again the following week with something that would look and sound like a compromise but would likely be a kick into the medium-length grass. Something like an "endeavour to revisit the backstop..." type clause which will buy off the rebels.

Put simply, it is her deal or no deal and it is not going to be no deal.

You're forgetting your own usual logic. Why would Labour vote for it?

There isn't going to be any deal acceptable to the DUP, and even in the best case scenario for the government there will be Tory rebels.

Labour might abstain at the price of a general election, ideally post-March 29th. Seek to "win the peace" and all that. Quite how that bargain could be struck is beyond me at the moment (obviously there is a NoCon route to one).

That would mean Labour would own this, betray their members and then even if they win the GE they’ll be consumed by further Brexit negotiations.

Well, there'll be further Brexit negotiations in any case [even under Remain, one suspects]. If it really comes down to Deal vs No Deal, then letting the Deal through with a GE attached isn't a bad result for Labour.

Alanbrooke

david_herdson said:

rcs1000 said:

Sean_F said:

O/T I see President Macron's approval rating is now down to 18%.

Trump's rating is stellar by comparison (as is May's).

To be fair, they've both lost about the same number of percentage points of support since their election. People forget that Macron only got about 25% in the first round

Apples and pears. The report suggested that Macron would currently win well over his current approval rating in a first round election because although many French don't approve of him, they dislike the alternatives even more.

Im not so sure. The first round tends to be a free for all where people vote according to their choice and there are usually about 8 or 9 candidates

If he makes it in to the second round diiferent call

The risk for France is Lepen versus Melenchon which is not impossible. If Macron faces Lepen he will win as the left will vote to keep Lepen out. If its Macron versus Melenchon it's a closer call a lot of FN voters used to be on the extreme left

Big_G_NorthWales

tottenhamWC said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

I agree with Alastair.

Mrs May will have done her duty, and remarkably well in the awful circumstances. She has come back with a decent implementation of Brexit, which is as good as anyone could have got. It reflects the letter and spirit of the referendum result. Although much detail remains to be filled in, it looks as though it would achieve this without causing too much economic damage. She has even managed to get the EU to back down on one of their sacred 'four freedoms'.

But there's a fatal flaw: she hasn't brought MPs along with her. Maybe it would always have been impossible to do so, given the catastrophic GE2017 result, but she hasn't helped herself by her remote and inflexible style.

Nonetheless she comes out of this with enormous credit for her determination and resilience. Whatever comes next will be even more chaotic, but it will no longer be her problem.

In practice, I can't see any alternative now to asking for an Article 50 extension, and probably a referendum to decide between Revoke and the Deal, which would have the great merit that either result would be workable. The obstacles to getting there, legal and political, are horrendous, but does anyone else have any better idea?

+1

Indeed

Stark_Dawning

Richard_Tyndall said:

Scott_P said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

We did. We told them it would only work with someone who understood and believed in Brexit in charge.

Another unicorn

Theresa May demonstrates more understanding of Brexit than any one of the Brexiteers

Rubbish. She understands Brexit as well as you do and to be frank I often wonder how you manage to tie your own shoelaces in the morning.

Then you shouldn’t have gone ahead with it until you were absolutely certain that one of The Enlightened would be running it, if it was so obvious that a non-Enlightened in control would bring about this disaster.

dixiedean

Good piece. And if pushed would tend to agree with its conclusions.
When the deal was signed we were assured by many posters that Tory rebels would fall into line, and that Labour would obviously abstain.
Still seems to be some wishful thinking. May won't win the vote. Labour won't abstain. We're 12 days since the agreement was signed. Nothing that has happened since then suggests either prospect has come closer. It is going down.

AllyPally_Rob

Scott_P said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

We did. We told them it would only work with someone who understood and believed in Brexit in charge.

Another unicorn

Theresa May demonstrates more understanding of Brexit than any one of the Brexiteers

It's a shame she felt the need to lie to parliament and the general public about the Irish Sea customs border though. 2 years of telling everyone they could have their cake and eat it, then suddenly at the last minute admitting to the truth that had been plain to see all along.

I'd have a lot more respect for her if she'd been honest from the get go.

Philip_Thompson

Sean_F said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Can I please ask a question for any leavers who believe the backstop is a price worth paying to ensure Brexit ... of whom there are a few here, Casino, Sean F and Richard T I believe ... would you say that still if instead of being for Northern Ireland it instead applied to England and Scotland?

If we were being told that upon exit England and Scotland would still in perpetuity be subjected to EU regulations, would in perpetuity be stuck in the customs area . . . And that we would have no MEPs etc to change that and we could never unilaterally end this arrangement, it would take EU permission to change anything and that might never come ...

... if the backstop applies to us would you still think it was a price worth paying?

If at the same time, we were making no financial contributions to the EU, and were exempt from FOM, I would accept that the backstop was mutually uncomfortable, and that each side had good reason to compromise in future negotiations.

I don't understand this logic.

We will be in a position where we have free trade but on Europes terms and subject to Europes rules and customs. No say in rules or customs and no money or free movement as you say.

Now what is going to change? Unless we are going to restore paying money to them, or going to restore free movement then what do they gain from a free trade deal which isn't entirely written by them to suit them? Unless we are planning to end free trade, start paying or start free movement it looks like the only variable to be changed is to restore control from them to us but what do they gain from that?

Alanbrooke

Big_G_NorthWales said:

grabcocque said:

TOPPING said:

Well somehow I am thinking that the Cons will come round. If not on first vote, then on second.

Once more for those at the back:

The passing of the Grieve amendment has permanently stripped May of any opportunity to ask Parliament to vote again. Whatever Plan B she wants is now irrelevant, because Parliament will salami-slice and amend it into whatever they want.

May has one *and only one* chance to prevent Parliament from Taking Back Control, and that's win the Meaningful Vote.

And may god have mercy on her soul.

Everything is up in the air even whether the vote will take place but while I accept TM may well resign, she will not resign offering a referendum.

The move in public opinion seems to be hardening against the EU and certainly another referendum does not seem at all certain

Maybe a taste of no deal but the UK and EU markets are tanking this afternoon

China v US

Tissue_Price

grabcocque said:

TOPPING said:

Well somehow I am thinking that the Cons will come round. If not on first vote, then on second.

Once more for those at the back:

The passing of the Grieve amendment has permanently stripped May of any opportunity to ask Parliament to vote again. Whatever Plan B she wants is now irrelevant, because Parliament will salami-slice and amend it into whatever they want.

May has one *and only one* chance to prevent Parliament from Taking Back Control, and that's win the Meaningful Vote.

And may god have mercy on her soul.

Parliament can amend the motion all they like, it doesn't change the fact that there is only one deal on the table and, absent it being agreed, we are leaving with No Deal on the 29th March.

The only way to change those facts is to pass new legislation (or take the risk of revoking A50 without an Act of Parliament; I can't see how that case could be decided other than in line with Miller).

Nigel_Foremain

Richard_Tyndall said:

Scott_P said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

We did. We told them it would only work with someone who understood and believed in Brexit in charge.

Another unicorn

Theresa May demonstrates more understanding of Brexit than any one of the Brexiteers

Rubbish. She understands Brexit as well as you do and to be frank I often wonder how you manage to tie your own shoelaces in the morning.

I have come to the conclusion that 52% of the population have Velcro on their shoes. Perhaps you prefer slip-ons?

Big_G_NorthWales

Alanbrooke said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

grabcocque said:

TOPPING said:

Well somehow I am thinking that the Cons will come round. If not on first vote, then on second.

Once more for those at the back:

The passing of the Grieve amendment has permanently stripped May of any opportunity to ask Parliament to vote again. Whatever Plan B she wants is now irrelevant, because Parliament will salami-slice and amend it into whatever they want.

May has one *and only one* chance to prevent Parliament from Taking Back Control, and that's win the Meaningful Vote.

And may god have mercy on her soul.

Everything is up in the air even whether the vote will take place but while I accept TM may well resign, she will not resign offering a referendum.

The move in public opinion seems to be hardening against the EU and certainly another referendum does not seem at all certain

Maybe a taste of no deal but the UK and EU markets are tanking this afternoon

China v US

Bloomberg were saying Brexit is weighting on sentiment as well as China v US

Pulpstar

Tissue_Price said:

grabcocque said:

TOPPING said:

Well somehow I am thinking that the Cons will come round. If not on first vote, then on second.

Once more for those at the back:

The passing of the Grieve amendment has permanently stripped May of any opportunity to ask Parliament to vote again. Whatever Plan B she wants is now irrelevant, because Parliament will salami-slice and amend it into whatever they want.

May has one *and only one* chance to prevent Parliament from Taking Back Control, and that's win the Meaningful Vote.

And may god have mercy on her soul.

Parliament can amend the motion all they like, it doesn't change the fact that there is only one deal on the table and, absent it being agreed, we are leaving with No Deal on the 29th March.

The only way to change those facts is to pass new legislation (or take the risk of revoking A50 without an Act of Parliament; I can't see how that case could be decided other than in line with Miller).

Has Grieve's amendment lulled the remainers into a false sense of security ?

Harris_Tweed

Richard_Nabavi said:

In practice, I can't see any alternative now to asking for an Article 50 extension, and probably a referendum to decide between Revoke and the Deal, which would have the great merit that either result would be workable. The obstacles to getting there, legal and political, are horrendous, but does anyone else have any better idea?

You may be right.

But given the number of people who believe Revoke *isn't* workable because "will of the people", and the number of workable options then left in your equation.. I find it remarkable how many MPs on both sides are treating this deal like leprosy.

TGOHF

Stark_Dawning said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Scott_P said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

We did. We told them it would only work with someone who understood and believed in Brexit in charge.

Another unicorn

Theresa May demonstrates more understanding of Brexit than any one of the Brexiteers

Rubbish. She understands Brexit as well as you do and to be frank I often wonder how you manage to tie your own shoelaces in the morning.

Then you shouldn’t have gone ahead with it until you were absolutely certain that one of The Enlightened would be running it, if it was so obvious that a non-Enlightened in control would bring about this disaster.

"you shouldn't"

Lol - I remember being asked at a GE to choose between two parties who wanted Brexit.

Turns out neither of them did.

IanB2

Stark_Dawning said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Scott_P said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

We did. We told them it would only work with someone who understood and believed in Brexit in charge.

Another unicorn

Theresa May demonstrates more understanding of Brexit than any one of the Brexiteers

Rubbish. She understands Brexit as well as you do and to be frank I often wonder how you manage to tie your own shoelaces in the morning.

Then you shouldn’t have gone ahead with it until you were absolutely certain that one of The Enlightened would be running it, if it was so obvious that a non-Enlightened in control would bring about this disaster.

Just a shame none of them really wanted the responsibility, and ran away from it the minute it threatened to bite.

grabcocque

This morning, May was dangling the idea of some Hail Mary amendment to the MV that would make the house's support conditional on MPs being able to vote to activate the backstop.

Given WA says no such thing is admissible, the ERG pointed out that the Government's offer was a nonsense. And the idea seems to have been quietly dropped as the ludicrous idea that it is.

So really Brady is saying the same thing as most of Parliament. The WA needs to be renegotiated to remove the backstop. Which May and the EU have repeatedly told us is "impossible".

Big_G_NorthWales

Philip_Thompson said:

Sean_F said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Can I please ask a question for any leavers who believe the backstop is a price worth paying to ensure Brexit ... of whom there are a few here, Casino, Sean F and Richard T I believe ... would you say that still if instead of being for Northern Ireland it instead applied to England and Scotland?

If we were being told that upon exit England and Scotland would still in perpetuity be subjected to EU regulations, would in perpetuity be stuck in the customs area . . . And that we would have no MEPs etc to change that and we could never unilaterally end this arrangement, it would take EU permission to change anything and that might never come ...

... if the backstop applies to us would you still think it was a price worth paying?

If at the same time, we were making no financial contributions to the EU, and were exempt from FOM, I would accept that the backstop was mutually uncomfortable, and that each side had good reason to compromise in future negotiations.

I don't understand this logic.

We will be in a position where we have free trade but on Europes terms and subject to Europes rules and customs. No say in rules or customs and no money or free movement as you say.

Now what is going to change? Unless we are going to restore paying money to them, or going to restore free movement then what do they gain from a free trade deal which isn't entirely written by them to suit them? Unless we are planning to end free trade, start paying or start free movement it looks like the only variable to be changed is to restore control from them to us but what do they gain from that?

Can you explain how the UK can export into the EU without their requirements on standards and regulations

Alanbrooke

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Alanbrooke said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

grabcocque said:

TOPPING said:

Well somehow I am thinking that the Cons will come round. If not on first vote, then on second.

Once more for those at the back:

The passing of the Grieve amendment has permanently stripped May of any opportunity to ask Parliament to vote again. Whatever Plan B she wants is now irrelevant, because Parliament will salami-slice and amend it into whatever they want.

May has one *and only one* chance to prevent Parliament from Taking Back Control, and that's win the Meaningful Vote.

And may god have mercy on her soul.

Everything is up in the air even whether the vote will take place but while I accept TM may well resign, she will not resign offering a referendum.

The move in public opinion seems to be hardening against the EU and certainly another referendum does not seem at all certain

Maybe a taste of no deal but the UK and EU markets are tanking this afternoon

China v US

Bloomberg were saying Brexit is weighting on sentiment as well as China v US

it will as will a dysfunctional government

Scott_P

Richard_Tyndall said:

Rubbish. She understands Brexit as well as you do and to be frank I often wonder how you manage to tie your own shoelaces in the morning.

LOL

Brexiteers don't know where they need to go to negotiate, how important Dover is, the fact we are an island, or who speaks for the EU.

It's amazing any of them can tie their shoelaces

Luckyguy1983

When Theresa may won the leadership election a lot of us questioned her achievements, and her supporters here said it was an achievement just to hang on in the home office. Once again she's hung on, but there is precious little else to note in her favour.

The negotiation has been disastrously mishandled. We owe the EU a great deal of money. Yes, we were never going to default on money we owed, but was every point negotiated on? The sum? The timespan of payments? There's a big difference between cash upfront and dragging it out. The EU was/is facing severe financial difficulties and we held all the cards. But to press home our advantage May would have risked inflicting a symbolic defeat on the EU - not something she would ever countenance.

Pulpstar

Stephen Lloyd is entirely implicitly correct, the sensible path is to support May's deal then go for another referendum if it fails thereafter. A point of nuance lost on Strong and Cable.

TGOHF

Scott_P said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Rubbish. She understands Brexit as well as you do and to be frank I often wonder how you manage to tie your own shoelaces in the morning.

how important Dover is

important to who ?

Luckyguy1983

Scott_P said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Rubbish. She understands Brexit as well as you do and to be frank I often wonder how you manage to tie your own shoelaces in the morning.

LOL

Brexiteers don't know where they need to go to negotiate, how important Dover is, the fact we are an island, or who speaks for the EU.

It's amazing any of them can tie their shoelaces

A string of memes is not an argument.

grabcocque

Tissue_Price said:

Parliament can amend the motion all they like, it doesn't change the fact that there is only one deal on the table and, absent it being agreed, we are leaving with No Deal on the 29th March.

The only way to change those facts is to pass new legislation (or take the risk of revoking A50 without an Act of Parliament; I can't see how that case could be decided other than in line with Miller).

The minutes and hours after the fall of the MV is going to be fascinating. We're going to see political aligments shift at a speed never before observed, as everyone vies to be in commanding position to drive Parliament's attempts to come to a settled view on what to do next.

Some of the following will happen. Labour will move a VONC, and the DUP will either abstain or vote against, letting the government survive. At that point they will shift to supporting one of:

* A second referendum on deal-vs-remain.
* The Norway+ pivot

But which way will Labour jump? It could go either way, but I think it depends a lot on exactly what happens in those all-important hours after the fall of the Meaningful Vote.

TGOHF

Luckyguy1983 said:

When Theresa may won the leadership election a lot of us questioned her achievements, and her supporters here said it was an achievement just to hang on in the home office. Once again she's hung on, but there is precious little else to note in her favour.

The negotiation has been disastrously mishandled. We owe the EU a great deal of money. Yes, we were never going to default on money we owed, but was every point negotiated on? The sum? The timespan of payments? There's a big difference between cash upfront and dragging it out. The EU was/is facing severe financial difficulties and we held all the cards. But to press home our advantage May would have risked inflicting a symbolic defeat on the EU - not something she would ever countenance.

Actually that would be a fair solution - as the EU doesn't want the backstop either - why not defer all payments until a trade deal completed and there is no need for the backstop.

Incentivise both sides.

TGOHF

Luckyguy1983 said:

Scott_P said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Rubbish. She understands Brexit as well as you do and to be frank I often wonder how you manage to tie your own shoelaces in the morning.

LOL

Brexiteers don't know where they need to go to negotiate, how important Dover is, the fact we are an island, or who speaks for the EU.

It's amazing any of them can tie their shoelaces

A string of memes is not an argument.

Take away Scotts stolen memes and tweets and well er..

TGOHF

https://twitter.com/henrymance/status/1070708271135232003

Brom

Scott_P said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Rubbish. She understands Brexit as well as you do and to be frank I often wonder how you manage to tie your own shoelaces in the morning.

LOL

Brexiteers don't know where they need to go to negotiate, how important Dover is, the fact we are an island, or who speaks for the EU.

It's amazing any of them can tie their shoelaces

Yeah, I bet they can't post 150 rubbish twitter memes a day either. The idiots!

Richard_Nabavi

grabcocque said:

Tissue_Price said:

Parliament can amend the motion all they like, it doesn't change the fact that there is only one deal on the table and, absent it being agreed, we are leaving with No Deal on the 29th March.

The only way to change those facts is to pass new legislation (or take the risk of revoking A50 without an Act of Parliament; I can't see how that case could be decided other than in line with Miller).

The minutes and hours after the fall of the MV is going to be fascinating. We're going to see political aligments shift at a speed never before observed, as everyone vies to be in commanding position to drive Parliament's attempts to come to a settled view on what to do next.

Some of the following will happen. Labour will move a VONC, and the DUP will either abstain or vote against, letting the government survive. At that point they will shift to supporting one of:

* A second referendum on deal-vs-remain.
* The Norway+ pivot

But which way will Labour jump? It could go either way, but I think it depends a lot on exactly what happens in those all-important hours after the fall of the Meaningful Vote.

Interesting, but does 'they' in 'they will shift to supporting one of...' refer to the DUP or the government?

Either way. one huge difficulty is that a pivot to Norway+ doesn't get round the backstop dead-end.

Pulpstar

There is a real problem with what to put on the ballot against remain. Parliament won't countenance no deal, and they'll have just rejected a sensible deal brought forward

Jonathan

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Sean_F said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Can I please ask a question for any leavers who believe the backstop is a price worth paying to ensure Brexit ... of whom there are a few here, Casino, Sean F and Richard T I believe ... would you say that still if instead of being for Northern Ireland it instead applied to England and Scotland?

If we were being told that upon exit England and Scotland would still in perpetuity be subjected to EU regulations, would in perpetuity be stuck in the customs area . . . And that we would have no MEPs etc to change that and we could never unilaterally end this arrangement, it would take EU permission to change anything and that might never come ...

... if the backstop applies to us would you still think it was a price worth paying?

If at the same time, we were making no financial contributions to the EU, and were exempt from FOM, I would accept that the backstop was mutually uncomfortable, and that each side had good reason to compromise in future negotiations.

I don't understand this logic.

We will be in a position where we have free trade but on Europes terms and subject to Europes rules and customs. No say in rules or customs and no money or free movement as you say.

Now what is going to change? Unless we are going to restore paying money to them, or going to restore free movement then what do they gain from a free trade deal which isn't entirely written by them to suit them? Unless we are planning to end free trade, start paying or start free movement it looks like the only variable to be changed is to restore control from them to us but what do they gain from that?

Can you explain how the UK can export into the EU without their requirements on standards and regulations

Through democratic engagement in the EU they are our shared standards that we develop together rather than theirs, which we implement without a say.

Big_G_NorthWales

grabcocque said:

Tissue_Price said:

Parliament can amend the motion all they like, it doesn't change the fact that there is only one deal on the table and, absent it being agreed, we are leaving with No Deal on the 29th March.

The only way to change those facts is to pass new legislation (or take the risk of revoking A50 without an Act of Parliament; I can't see how that case could be decided other than in line with Miller).

The minutes and hours after the fall of the MV is going to be fascinating. We're going to see political aligments shift at a speed never before observed, as everyone vies to be in commanding position to drive Parliament's attempts to come to a settled view on what to do next.

Some of the following will happen. Labour will move a VONC, and the DUP will either abstain or vote against, letting the government survive. At that point they will shift to supporting one of:

* A second referendum on deal-vs-remain.
* The Norway+ pivot

But which way will Labour jump? It could go either way, but I think it depends a lot on exactly what happens in those all-important hours after the fall of the Meaningful Vote.

You may be right but other 'products are available' !!!

Unless of course TM pulls the vote

stodge

Pulpstar said:

Stephen Lloyd is entirely implicitly correct, the sensible path is to support May's deal then go for another referendum if it fails thereafter. A point of nuance lost on Strong and Cable.

Nice to see there's still a few prepared to die in the ditch with Theresa.

She's produced a poor deal which many seem to think isn't worth supporting and because she refused to allow for the contingency planning of No Deal, what might have been an orderly and managed departure from the EU without an agreement risks turning into a national economic disaster.

Sean_F

Pulpstar said:

There is a real problem with what to put on the ballot against remain. Parliament won't countenance no deal, and they'll have just rejected a sensible deal brought forward

Remain v Join he Single Currency.

Benpointer

Great article Alastair - you should really be writing a regular column for a national broadsheet!

One quibble: Did you mean:
"Hardline Leavers must surely want a Brexit more than a perfect Brexit"
or should that be:
"Hardline Leavers must surely want an imperfect Brexit more than no Brexit"?

grabcocque

Richard_Nabavi said:

grabcocque said:

Tissue_Price said:

Parliament can amend the motion all they like, it doesn't change the fact that there is only one deal on the table and, absent it being agreed, we are leaving with No Deal on the 29th March.

The only way to change those facts is to pass new legislation (or take the risk of revoking A50 without an Act of Parliament; I can't see how that case could be decided other than in line with Miller).

The minutes and hours after the fall of the MV is going to be fascinating. We're going to see political aligments shift at a speed never before observed, as everyone vies to be in commanding position to drive Parliament's attempts to come to a settled view on what to do next.

Some of the following will happen. Labour will move a VONC, and the DUP will either abstain or vote against, letting the government survive. At that point they will shift to supporting one of:

* A second referendum on deal-vs-remain.
* The Norway+ pivot

But which way will Labour jump? It could go either way, but I think it depends a lot on exactly what happens in those all-important hours after the fall of the Meaningful Vote.

Interesting, but does 'they' in 'they will shift to supporting one of...' refer to the DUP or the government?

Either way. one difficulty is that a pivot to Norway+ doesn't get round the backstop dead-end.

Norway+ will certainly require both an extension to A50 and a significant renegotiation of both the WA and PD. Would be a seriously big ask of the EU27 unless they believe our pivot is genuine.

dixiedean

grabcocque said:

Tissue_Price said:

Parliament can amend the motion all they like, it doesn't change the fact that there is only one deal on the table and, absent it being agreed, we are leaving with No Deal on the 29th March.

The only way to change those facts is to pass new legislation (or take the risk of revoking A50 without an Act of Parliament; I can't see how that case could be decided other than in line with Miller).

The minutes and hours after the fall of the MV is going to be fascinating. We're going to see political aligments shift at a speed never before observed, as everyone vies to be in commanding position to drive Parliament's attempts to come to a settled view on what to do next.

Some of the following will happen. Labour will move a VONC, and the DUP will either abstain or vote against, letting the government survive. At that point they will shift to supporting one of:

* A second referendum on deal-vs-remain.
* The Norway+ pivot

But which way will Labour jump? It could go either way, but I think it depends a lot on exactly what happens in those all-important hours after the fall of the Meaningful Vote.

Surely we MUST have 48 letters then, too. Which means the Conservative Party tectonic plates will buckle.
In which case any potential new PM is going to have to get off the fence and outline an at least plausible way forward.*

*Boris, Rees Mogg excepted, natch.

Scott_P

Luckyguy1983 said:

A string of memes is not an argument.

Every time a Brexiteer speaks they prove they know less than the PM.