One interesting aspect of No Deal Brexit is that several million EU citizens in the UK become illegals overnight, including a significant percentage of my department. Of course it would be absurd to treat them as such, but in law it will become an offence for an employer to pay them, for a landlord to rent to them, for a bank to give them a mortgage or even an account. The "hostile environment" will apply, and it would be racist to apply it it african irregulars but not european ones.
I cannot see it being enforced, but an interesting wrinkle.
That is a matter in our hands and the government is clear that even in the event of a no deal Brexit the existing rights of those migrants will be protected. It is, however, something that will require legislation and a massive amount of additional regulatory control. I don't see how we avoid issuing 4m certificates giving rights of occupancy, work etc. It seems incredible to me that work is not further advanced on that. It is going to be a massive logistical task.
I was aware of that but it is still at the information stage (so far as I understand it) and we are supposed to be leaving in 100 days or so. As @Foxy says the reality is that we will simply have to ignore our own laws for years to get this sorted.
Yesterday was a day of tumult, with an astonishing result.
My bets finished in the green. May did win, so that failed, but backing 100-149 at 3 came off (a similar bet for a higher band against May failed). Ahead overall, though.
Corbyn got confused and met the wrong Democratic Unionists. He met the Arab Democratic Unionists in Syria instead.
It's a bit like the time he got confused and walked past all those empty seats to make a video about how crowded the train was. Or the time he got muddled over where he was laying a wreath and instead of laying it at a memorial to victims of Mossad laid it on the grave of a mass murderer.
No deal is already legislated for in the EU Withdrawal Act 2017, any deal or other option that changes that status quo needs to be legislated for between now and 29th March.
A single vote in the Commons can’t stop no deal, no matter how much those wishing that outcome think it can. I’m not even sure that most of the MPs have yet realised they’re not going to get a single day off in Q1 next year. There’s going to be a *lot* of bills to pass.
As I asked before, though, might it be possible for a PM to revoke A50 pre March 29, and Parliament to legislate afterwards ?
I imagine that the Supreme Court would rule, as they did in Miller, that actions that would repeal legislation can’t be taken purely by the Executive and require primary legislation to be legal. Hence the two-line bill that became the EU (Notification of Withdrawal) Act 2017.
I also imagine that @Scott_P will disagree with me.
It will probably be referred to the SC by someone whatever happens, if for any reason the government suggests revoking A50.
Then of course there’s the political fallout from overturning the referendum result, but that’s a question for another day.
Immigration will always be an issue until this incompetent Gov actually come up with an immigration policy that ends the immigration apartheid between EU and non EU immigration and starts to invest in infrastructure such as hospitals, GP surgeries,, schools, roads, housing - consistent with having high levels of immigration. Blaming freedom of movement and then just switching to non EU immigration when it’s reversed shows nothing but the intellectual bankruptcy at the heart of this Gov and it’s domestic policy agenda.
I doubt if they are, to be honest. Of course the DUP could be lying when they say they know nothing about this, but Labour under Corbyn have a far more imposing track record of dishonesty and incompetence and assuming they are not telling the truth should really be the default. It's hard to see what the DUP have to gain from toppling the government at this moment when they remain the kingmakers.
I think this is just stirring to keep the pressure on Theresa May. Bad politics, though. The quickest way to ensure the DUP won't support Labour at all (and I would remind everyone that if the abstain on a confidence motion the Tories would almost certainly win) is to look as though you're taking them for granted.
The private sector must (on average) be getting real wage rises, as in the public sector we are continuing to get real terms wage cuts each year. Minus 2% for me.
One of the pleasures of watching early episodes of Neighbours was seeing the walls wobble every time someone closed a door.
I do wonder if Brookside had it right: build a new close of real houses and film (at least the exteriors) in them. Then when the series ends, flog them off!
May seems determined to play the most dangerous of games. With no majority for her deal, instead of finding common ground with others, she will look for technical fudge in the EU and delay the vote to a point where she will claim that there is no alternative to back her deal.
She wants to force her medicine down the neck of the Commons and the country. She is so convinced that she alone is right she will not stop or work with others. The Tories should have got rid of her when they had the chance.
You sound like you were talking about Corbyn..... so I fixed it for you
"He wants to force his medicine down the neck of the Commons and the country. He is so convinced that he alone is right he will not stop or work with others. ...... Labour should have got rid of him when they had the chance"
If it doesn't have Commons support, May can revoke Article 50 to avoid it.
Annnnnnnnd we're back...
Not without passing primary legislation, as I proved last night.
But that misses the point, anyway. You can't "rule out no deal", you can only replace it with either passing a deal or overturning the 2016 result.
You proved nothing of the sort. Like so many others, you read section 1 of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 which repeals the 1972 Act with effect 29 March 2019.
But you didn't read section 25, which says section 1 is not in force, and requires secondary legislation to bring into force.
Given the low hurdle for bringing it into force, the ECJ isn't going to accept revocation with it on the statute books.
Nonsense. The 1972 Act is in force until it isn't. It isn't Scrodinger's Act. The height of the hurdles in the way of repeal have nothing to do with it.
May seems determined to play the most dangerous of games. With no majority for her deal, instead of finding common ground with others, she will look for technical fudge in the EU and delay the vote to a point where she will claim that there is no alternative to back her deal.
She wants to force her medicine down the neck of the Commons and the country. She is so convinced that she alone is right she will not stop or work with others. The Tories should have got rid of her when they had the chance.
Don’t you get it? there is no common ground. There’s enough never leavers on the government side, and enough “anything but a wall at Dover and a two finger salute to the french is a betrayal” to make the two sides irreconcilable.
Would I be right that Theresa May stays in office under those circumstances? In ye olden days the fall of the Government would've implied that the Leader of the Opposition would've been called by the Queen, but I'm guessing now that the incumbent stays put unless or until someone else can win a VoC?
No, that wasn't how it worked in ye olden days. The government was defeated in a confidence vote 3 times in the 20th Century. Only one of them (January 1924) led to the government resigning and the Leader of the Opposition forming a minority government. In the other two cases (October 1924 and March 1979) the Prime Minister remained as PM and a general election was called.
The private sector must (on average) be getting real wage rises, as in the public sector we are continuing to get real terms wage cuts each year. Minus 2% for me.
Given the low hurdle for bringing it into force, the ECJ isn't going to accept revocation with it on the statute books.
Not sure that is true either.
The clause says "The European Communities Act 1972 is repealed on exit day."
If we revoke Article 50, there is no exit day, and the clause can never be put into effect
Exit day is defined in section 20 as 29 March 2019. But this can be amended by secondary legislation and, as I've said, rather crucially section 1 isn't in force.
May seems determined to play the most dangerous of games. With no majority for her deal, instead of finding common ground with others, she will look for technical fudge in the EU and delay the vote to a point where she will claim that there is no alternative to back her deal.
She wants to force her medicine down the neck of the Commons and the country. She is so convinced that she alone is right she will not stop or work with others. The Tories should have got rid of her when they had the chance.
You sound like you were talking about Corbyn..... so I fixed it for you
"He wants to force his medicine down the neck of the Commons and the country. He is so convinced that he alone is right he will not stop or work with others. ...... Labour should have got rid of him when they had the chance"
The problem is EVERYONE in the Commons is so convinced they are right that they are not budging an inch.
Which would matter so much less if they were not all so tragically, disastrously wrong.
Yesterday was a day of tumult, with an astonishing result.
My bets finished in the green. May did win, so that failed, but backing 100-149 at 3 came off (a similar bet for a higher band against May failed). Ahead overall, though.
May seems determined to play the most dangerous of games. With no majority for her deal, instead of finding common ground with others, she will look for technical fudge in the EU and delay the vote to a point where she will claim that there is no alternative to back her deal.
She wants to force her medicine down the neck of the Commons and the country. She is so convinced that she alone is right she will not stop or work with others. The Tories should have got rid of her when they had the chance.
At the moment people are still talking about three options. At some point, something will change that will whittle that down to two options.
It could be that the passing of time makes no-Brexit impossible, so Labour MPs will have to decide if it’s deal or no deal.
It could also be that something changes that makes it deal or remain/extend A50, at which point those in favour of no deal need to decide whether to back the deal over no brexit.
Would I be right that Theresa May stays in office under those circumstances? In ye olden days the fall of the Government would've implied that the Leader of the Opposition would've been called by the Queen, but I'm guessing now that the incumbent stays put unless or until someone else can win a VoC?
No, that wasn't how it worked in ye olden days. The government was defeated in a confidence vote 3 times in the 20th Century. Only one of them (January 1924) led to the government resigning and the Leader of the Opposition forming a minority government. In the other two cases (October 1924 and March 1979) the Prime Minister remained as PM and a general election was called.
Wasn't it technically defeated on the Address in Reply rather than a confidence motion in 1924?
(And also of course everyone knew what was going to happen and a transfer of power had been quietly settled in advance between Baldwin, MacDonald and Asquith.)
I heard him after the vote.. He is another piece of work who thinks a lot more of himself that the rest of us. Soames is spot on.
Soames is a pompous windbag of no great intellect. JRM needs to find something he can organise in a brewery. He and his ERG chums have been shown to be pretty second rate compared to the likes of Dominic Grieve whose interventions on Brexit have been clinical and highly successful. The fact that Soames and JRM are Tory MPs says more about the poverty of Tory candidate selection than anything else.
Sadly, though, as a Leaver, I don’t share Grieve’s opinions or views. Shame there is no one of his ability in the Leave camp.
The private sector must (on average) be getting real wage rises, as in the public sector we are continuing to get real terms wage cuts each year. Minus 2% for me.
shall we talk about pensions ?
One reason that I am keen to claim mine! If I take early retirement this year then I get CPI rises each year.
One of many reasons why retention of senior staff is so poor. The finances make it foolish to stay in the job.
How on Earth does a couple of streets of fake building facades cost £90m? Are they relocating Eastenders to Mayfair?
I *guess* the problem is having to do it around existing filming schedules - ISTR (*) they had to do the rebuild in the same location as the 'original' sets.
Performing big upgrades whilst maintaining operations is difficult and can be very costly. As the railways have discovered ...
Corrections: In a break this week from correcting every piece of journalism ever written by carole cadwalladr, we have an update on the DUP. We would like to set the record straight. In the past we may have referred to them as backwards, bigoted reactionary extremists with fascists tendencies. We would like to make clear that the DUP are now part of the People’s movement, and share our values on social justice, and improvements to knee cap surgeries. We stand in solidarity with them.
The private sector must (on average) be getting real wage rises, as in the public sector we are continuing to get real terms wage cuts each year. Minus 2% for me.
shall we talk about pensions ?
One reason that I am keen to claim mine! If I take early retirement this year then I get CPI rises each year.
One of many reasons why retention of senior staff is so poor. The finances make it foolish to stay in the job.
My GP mate is the same and will chuck it in next year and then do locums.
Given the shellacking private sector pensions and wages have had we'd love to share your pain :-)
If it doesn't have Commons support, May can revoke Article 50 to avoid it.
Annnnnnnnd we're back...
Not without passing primary legislation, as I proved last night.
But that misses the point, anyway. You can't "rule out no deal", you can only replace it with either passing a deal or overturning the 2016 result.
You proved nothing of the sort. Like so many others, you read section 1 of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 which repeals the 1972 Act with effect 29 March 2019.
But you didn't read section 25, which says section 1 is not in force, and requires secondary legislation to bring into force.
Given the low hurdle for bringing it into force, the ECJ isn't going to accept revocation with it on the statute books.
Nonsense. The 1972 Act is in force until it isn't. It isn't Scrodinger's Act. The height of the hurdles in the way of repeal have nothing to do with it.
Edit I mean agree with the assertion that leaving in an orderly fashion is optional but leaving on 29th March isn't.
If that is anything close to the truth then May’s gross negligence in failing to prepare for a no deal Brexit is even more inexplicable. No deal would be chaotic now for the first few years because of lack of planning and infrastructure investment and that will be criminal if it was always the fall back position.
Personally, I don’t think parliament will ever let that happen.
I heard him after the vote.. He is another piece of work who thinks a lot more of himself that the rest of us. Soames is spot on.
Soames is a pompous windbag of no great intellect. JRM needs to find something he can organise in a brewery. He and his ERG chums have been shown to be pretty second rate compared to the likes of Dominic Grieve whose interventions on Brexit have been clinical and highly successful. The fact that Soames and JRM are Tory MPs says more about the poverty of Tory candidate selection than anything else.
Sadly, though, as a Leaver, I don’t share Grieve’s opinions or views. Shame there is no one of his ability in the Leave camp.
Soames and Mogg are old Etonians, Grieve is a little lower down the public school food chain having gone to Westminster not Eton
Here's a question. Following yesterday's events, what should the correct price be for Jeremy Corbyn to be next Prime Minister?
He gets there only if (a) he defeats Theresa May at a general election or (b) if he successfully gets a vote of no confidence in the government andgets to form a government of his own, and before the Conservatives replace Theresa May.
Theresa May more or less ruled out leading the Conservatives into the next general election to her MPs yesterday (though in my view that was not new news). If a general election were forced on her at short notice, that might change, but that must be firmly odds against - maybe a 1 in 10 shot. If it were forced on her, the Tories would presumably be poorly placed and would have maybe a 1 in 4 chance of forming the next government. So that's a 7.5% chance all round that Jeremy Corbyn gets to be next Prime Minister that way.
The maths of the current Parliament are such that without a major realignment Jeremy Corbyn is only going to form a minority government in unusual circumstances. The atmosphere is febrile but I can't make it more than a 1 in 20 shot at present that that happens before the Conservatives replace Theresa May. Even if there is a major realignment, he might well not be the beneficiary of it. It's not as though his own MPs like him much. So that's another 5%.
Totting that up, I make that 12.5%, or a 7/1 shot. Does that feel about right to others?
Immigration will always be an issue until this incompetent Gov actually come up with an immigration policy that ends the immigration apartheid between EU and non EU immigration and starts to invest in infrastructure such as hospitals, GP surgeries,, schools, roads, housing - consistent with having high levels of immigration. Blaming freedom of movement and then just switching to non EU immigration when it’s reversed shows nothing but the intellectual bankruptcy at the heart of this Gov and it’s domestic policy agenda.
Every single country in the world discriminates between people on the basis of country of origin. Why? Because it's a useful heuristic.
Yes and being secure for a year from no confidence votes and having said she will not lead the Tories at another general election May can focus on her legacy and getting her Deal through at all costs after a few tweaks, even threatening Eurosceptics with a Deal v Remain referendum if she has to
I heard him after the vote.. He is another piece of work who thinks a lot more of himself that the rest of us. Soames is spot on.
Soames is a pompous windbag of no great intellect. JRM needs to find something he can organise in a brewery. He and his ERG chums have been shown to be pretty second rate compared to the likes of Dominic Grieve whose interventions on Brexit have been clinical and highly successful. The fact that Soames and JRM are Tory MPs says more about the poverty of Tory candidate selection than anything else.
Sadly, though, as a Leaver, I don’t share Grieve’s opinions or views. Shame there is no one of his ability in the Leave camp.
Soames and Mogg are old Etonians, Grieve is a little lower down the public school food chain having gone to Westminster not Eton
I am more interested in their abilities, or lack thereof, myself than their education. I don’t have any bias either way, as a grammar school boy, for or against particular schools.
How on Earth does a couple of streets of fake building facades cost £90m? Are they relocating Eastenders to Mayfair?
I *guess* the problem is having to do it around existing filming schedules - ISTR (*) they had to do the rebuild in the same location as the 'original' sets.
Performing big upgrades whilst maintaining operations is difficult and can be very costly. As the railways have discovered ...
(*) It might have been Coronation Street ...
That would make sense, yes it’s going to be really expensive if they have to work three days at a time while leaving the set looking identical every time they finish.
Yes, I have bad memories of the WCML upgrade project, which managed to cause massive disturbance at the same time as running way late and way over budget. With hindsight they would have been much better having the guts to close it completely for a year and do all the works in one go.
ISTR Coronation St rebuilt their entire set at a new location, and as the area around the old Granada Studios became trendy they made a fortune selling it off.
No deal is already legislated for in the EU Withdrawal Act 2017, any deal or other option that changes that status quo needs to be legislated for between now and 29th March.
A single vote in the Commons can’t stop no deal, no matter how much those wishing that outcome think it can. I’m not even sure that most of the MPs have yet realised they’re not going to get a single day off in Q1 next year. There’s going to be a *lot* of bills to pass.
As I asked before, though, might it be possible for a PM to revoke A50 pre March 29, and Parliament to legislate afterwards ?
I imagine that the Supreme Court would rule, as they did in Miller, that actions that would repeal legislation can’t be taken purely by the Executive and require primary legislation to be legal. Hence the two-line bill that became the EU (Notification of Withdrawal) Act 2017.
I also imagine that @Scott_P will disagree with me.
It will probably be referred to the SC by someone whatever happens, if for any reason the government suggests revoking A50.
Then of course there’s the political fallout from overturning the referendum result, but that’s a question for another day.
But the SC would take some time to hear the case; how might they do so had Parliament legislated in the meantime ?
Here's a question. Following yesterday's events, what should the correct price be for Jeremy Corbyn to be next Prime Minister?
He gets there only if (a) he defeats Theresa May at a general election or (b) if he successfully gets a vote of no confidence in the government andgets to form a government of his own, and before the Conservatives replace Theresa May.
Theresa May more or less ruled out leading the Conservatives into the next general election to her MPs yesterday (though in my view that was not new news). If a general election were forced on her at short notice, that might change, but that must be firmly odds against - maybe a 1 in 10 shot. If it were forced on her, the Tories would presumably be poorly placed and would have maybe a 1 in 4 chance of forming the next government. So that's a 7.5% chance all round that Jeremy Corbyn gets to be next Prime Minister that way.
The maths of the current Parliament are such that without a major realignment Jeremy Corbyn is only going to form a minority government in unusual circumstances. The atmosphere is febrile but I can't make it more than a 1 in 20 shot at present that that happens before the Conservatives replace Theresa May. Even if there is a major realignment, he might well not be the beneficiary of it. It's not as though his own MPs like him much. So that's another 5%.
Totting that up, I make that 12.5%, or a 7/1 shot. Does that feel about right to others?
It does, I think a lot of people are conflating the probability of Corbyn becoming PM in the next couple of years with him being the "next" PM
Immigration will always be an issue until this incompetent Gov actually come up with an immigration policy that ends the immigration apartheid between EU and non EU immigration and starts to invest in infrastructure such as hospitals, GP surgeries,, schools, roads, housing - consistent with having high levels of immigration. Blaming freedom of movement and then just switching to non EU immigration when it’s reversed shows nothing but the intellectual bankruptcy at the heart of this Gov and it’s domestic policy agenda.
Every single country in the world discriminates between people on the basis of country of origin. Why? Because it's a useful heuristic.
And, to be fair, would be immigrants discriminate when choosing their countries of destination...
That clown did not know we were an island , now we know he is unable to read a graph that a 5 year old could understand. The sooner this lot are consigned to the bin the better, impossible for any government to be worse.
Immigration will always be an issue until this incompetent Gov actually come up with an immigration policy that ends the immigration apartheid between EU and non EU immigration and starts to invest in infrastructure such as hospitals, GP surgeries,, schools, roads, housing - consistent with having high levels of immigration. Blaming freedom of movement and then just switching to non EU immigration when it’s reversed shows nothing but the intellectual bankruptcy at the heart of this Gov and it’s domestic policy agenda.
Every single country in the world discriminates between people on the basis of country of origin. Why? Because it's a useful heuristic.
I wouldn’t know enough about other countries immigration policies to say. I’ll settle for seeing ours and commenting on that when our politicians can be bothered to extract their digits and put one together.
May seems determined to play the most dangerous of games. With no majority for her deal, instead of finding common ground with others, she will look for technical fudge in the EU and delay the vote to a point where she will claim that there is no alternative to back her deal.
She wants to force her medicine down the neck of the Commons and the country. She is so convinced that she alone is right she will not stop or work with others. The Tories should have got rid of her when they had the chance.
Given the amount of press he gets and his background, he’s on thin ice with media hungry, busted flush accusations. But self-awareness never seems to have been his strength.
British politicians are incapable about sensible discussions on this matter - I think a Royal Commission is probably needed. a lot of waffle, (unjusitifed) fear and false stats fuel a real sense of crisis. Not to mention it was weaponised during the referendum and will remain so for the forseeable future.
No, it was weaponised when Bliar and his cronies decided to sabotage our immigration controls to "rub the right's nose in diversity". Whether or not anybody used those exact words, that's what happened. And of course, like so much of what they did, it has backfired spectacularly.
The RN ( old front Nationale ) tops the poll for Euro elections with 24% Macron trails at 18%. Melenchon at 9% amaxingly the Socialists the one time government are on 4.5%
so currently a third of french voters are off to the extremes
I've been banging on about this for a while. If Theresa May really digs her heels in over her deal and refuses to budge (and I think we can appreciate by now that she is very stubborn,) then the only weapon left at the Remainers' disposal is to effect a political realignment. The Conservative pro-EU forces can't split their own party and leave Labour in one piece - firstly because they would be wiped out at the General Election that would soon follow, secondly because they'd never vote for Prime Minister Corbyn - so they need the Labour pro-EU MPs to jump ship in tandem.
If both sides quit en masse then they might well (especially with the help of the SNP and other bits and pieces) have the Commons majority needed to form an emergency Government, repeal all the Brexit legislation and then revoke A50. It's the only way I can see, so long as Theresa May won't give in, that we avoid No Deal - but it would involve a complete re-ordering of the party political system, arguably more dramatic and sudden than anything previously seen in our history. That is why the probability of No Deal by default seems so significant. To me, anyway.
It's only the Remainers, digging their heels in and keeping to the hope of ignoring the Referendum result, that keeps No Deal alive. Just give up, Remainers - accept the Referendum result, vote for/abstain on May's deal, then we can all get on with life.
that provides no solution to Northern Ireland, Gibraltar and the 48% plus who deserve a voice
It is ultimately Labour and the minority parties stopping this - for political ntally really a conservative issue first and foremost).
Given the above dynamic, there needs to be something new that breaks out of the status quo that calls Labour's bluff - either a softer Brexit or a referendum.
Otherwise we are heading for no deal and the conservatives will have to own this. But worse, it will still need to get sorted - no deal is clearly very temporary.
'It is ultimately Labour and the minority parties stopping this - for political reasons.’
Yes; they recognise that reasonably large numbers of people now realise that a Leave vote was a mistake and if the vote was re-run the margin might well be the other way. We really shouldn't make such an enormous change on a tiny majority of votes.
Labour's official policy is still to leave, after renegotiating. So if their opposition is actually about recognising people dont want to leave they are a bunch of liars right now.
Labour are conducting themselves very professionally in the commons. A good sign for what a Labour govt might be like
Yes. Corbyn is playing a blinder. Labour just need to wait it out now - The next election is in the bag and it will be with a majority as well.
No it won't, not one poll gives Labour a majority and in any case given the largely ERG vote got 117 votes yesterday that should be enough for Boris to get to the final two and likely win the membership vote given May confirmed she would stand down before the next general election
I heard him after the vote.. He is another piece of work who thinks a lot more of himself that the rest of us. Soames is spot on.
Soames is a pompous windbag of no great intellect. JRM needs to find something he can organise in a brewery. He and his ERG chums have been shown to be pretty second rate compared to the likes of Dominic Grieve whose interventions on Brexit have been clinical and highly successful. The fact that Soames and JRM are Tory MPs says more about the poverty of Tory candidate selection than anything else.
Sadly, though, as a Leaver, I don’t share Grieve’s opinions or views. Shame there is no one of his ability in the Leave camp.
Soames and Mogg are old Etonians, Grieve is a little lower down the public school food chain having gone to Westminster not Eton
Do Westminster then prioritise brains over blaggery ?
May seems determined to play the most dangerous of games. With no majority for her deal, instead of finding common ground with others, she will look for technical fudge in the EU and delay the vote to a point where she will claim that there is no alternative to back her deal.
She wants to force her medicine down the neck of the Commons and the country. She is so convinced that she alone is right she will not stop or work with others. The Tories should have got rid of her when they had the chance.
Off her trolley.
just finished Civil War malc. I had seen it before but back to back its a lot more enjoyable
No deal is already legislated for in the EU Withdrawal Act 2017, any deal or other option that changes that status quo needs to be legislated for between now and 29th March.
A single vote in the Commons can’t stop no deal, no matter how much those wishing that outcome think it can. I’m not even sure that most of the MPs have yet realised they’re not going to get a single day off in Q1 next year. There’s going to be a *lot* of bills to pass.
As I asked before, though, might it be possible for a PM to revoke A50 pre March 29, and Parliament to legislate afterwards ?
I imagine that the Supreme Court would rule, as they did in Miller, that actions that would repeal legislation can’t be taken purely by the Executive and require primary legislation to be legal. Hence the two-line bill that became the EU (Notification of Withdrawal) Act 2017.
I also imagine that @Scott_P will disagree with me.
It will probably be referred to the SC by someone whatever happens, if for any reason the government suggests revoking A50.
Then of course there’s the political fallout from overturning the referendum result, but that’s a question for another day.
But the SC would take some time to hear the case; how might they do so had Parliament legislated in the meantime ?
They were pretty quick to hear Miller, as was the ECJ with the A50 case.
I can’t see any legal (as opposed to political) issue with the government revoking A50 after first legislating for it and passing a Bill into law, given that the ECJ ruled we can do so unilaterally - but IANAL.
The present Dublin Convention is broken, and it can’t be sustained. It puts undue pressure on the states -- which by an accident of geography -- lie close to Africa or the Middle East.
The EU has frankly allowed the Eastern states to adopt a ludicrous position.
Countries like Hungary or Romania or the Baltic states value freedom of movement for their own citizens.
This has caused widespread emigration of the young, the able and the gifted. In some cases, such as the Baltic states, it has even led to the populations of these countries to fall, despite a desire by many people outside Europe to come to Europe.
Yet these states, which are in desperate need of more people, are the most vocal in opposing the immigration of others outside the EU.
For every Lithuanian who moves out of Lithuania, an immigrant who wishes to resettle in the EU should be moved to Lithuania.
If Lithuania can support a population of just under 4 million, and its present population is now 2.8 million, then it is immoral of Lithuania to deny the rights of others from less fortunate parts of the world to settle in Lithuania.
Freedom of movement for your citizens should also mean that -- if your citizens move to Germany or the UK -- they can be replenished by immigrants from elsewhere.
Some European states have far too many people who are alien to European Christian values. This results in the sort of incident that happened in Strasbourg/Straßburg earlier this week. Other European states have recognised this problem and don't want to import it to their own countries. I don't criticise them for this approach. Orban's approach is far wiser than Merkel's.
One could save time and go straight to Breitbart in order to read racist drivel like this.
I heard him after the vote.. He is another piece of work who thinks a lot more of himself that the rest of us. Soames is spot on.
Soames is a pompous windbag of no great intellect. JRM needs to find something he can organise in a brewery. He and his ERG chums have been shown to be pretty second rate compared to the likes of Dominic Grieve whose interventions on Brexit have been clinical and highly successful. The fact that Soames and JRM are Tory MPs says more about the poverty of Tory candidate selection than anything else.
Sadly, though, as a Leaver, I don’t share Grieve’s opinions or views. Shame there is no one of his ability in the Leave camp.
Soames and Mogg are old Etonians, Grieve is a little lower down the public school food chain having gone to Westminster not Eton
I am more interested in their abilities, or lack thereof, myself than their education. I don’t have any bias either way, as a grammar school boy, for or against particular schools.
Yes but in Tory snob order of precedence Eton comes before Harrow comes before Westminster, that is why we have had 4 Etonian Tory PMs since WW2, 1 Harrovian and 1 Deputy PM from Westminster, Clegg
Mr. P, I wonder if that Hodges line, which is correct, means a second referendum is more or less likely.
May can either try winding down the clock and daring Remainers not to back her rubbish deal, or threaten a second referendum, which would lose many Remainers but perhaps persuade some Leavers to back it.
The private sector must (on average) be getting real wage rises, as in the public sector we are continuing to get real terms wage cuts each year. Minus 2% for me.
shall we talk about pensions ?
One reason that I am keen to claim mine! If I take early retirement this year then I get CPI rises each year.
One of many reasons why retention of senior staff is so poor. The finances make it foolish to stay in the job.
I cashed mine in and kept working , suppose you will not have that option.
That clown did not know we were an island , now we know he is unable to read a graph that a 5 year old could understand. The sooner this lot are consigned to the bin the better, impossible for any government to be worse.
Edit I mean agree with the assertion that leaving in an orderly fashion is optional but leaving on 29th March isn't.
The duty to Brexit thing is a nice story. An alternative way of interpreting what she's doing is that she wants to carry on being PM for as long as possible, and everything else is she's doing is optimized for that.
Can anyone think of an objective reason to believe in the "duty" theory over the "wants to be PM" theory?
Yes - because she is fighting tooth and nail to get her deal agreed, and if it ever is the DUP will end her premiership. Her sense of duty may be misplaced or wrong, and she has taken pointless self preserving actions like pulling the MV, but passing the deal does not optimize her staying on as PM.
I heard him after the vote.. He is another piece of work who thinks a lot more of himself that the rest of us. Soames is spot on.
Soames is a pompous windbag of no great intellect. JRM needs to find something he can organise in a brewery. He and his ERG chums have been shown to be pretty second rate compared to the likes of Dominic Grieve whose interventions on Brexit have been clinical and highly successful. The fact that Soames and JRM are Tory MPs says more about the poverty of Tory candidate selection than anything else.
Sadly, though, as a Leaver, I don’t share Grieve’s opinions or views. Shame there is no one of his ability in the Leave camp.
Soames and Mogg are old Etonians, Grieve is a little lower down the public school food chain having gone to Westminster not Eton
Do Westminster then prioritise brains over blaggery ?
Westminster pupils are brainy, maybe even more then Wykehamists but having brains does not automatically make you top of the social food chain
British politicians are incapable about sensible discussions on this matter - I think a Royal Commission is probably needed. a lot of waffle, (unjusitifed) fear and false stats fuel a real sense of crisis. Not to mention it was weaponised during the referendum and will remain so for the forseeable future.
No, it was weaponised when Bliar and his cronies decided to sabotage our immigration controls to "rub the right's nose in diversity". Whether or not anybody used those exact words, that's what happened. And of course, like so much of what they did, it has backfired spectacularly.
I heard him after the vote.. He is another piece of work who thinks a lot more of himself that the rest of us. Soames is spot on.
I get he's upset and still intending to rebel, but it makes no sense for him to whine like a baby because Tory party rules don't put a rule in that x voting against is enough even without a majority.
May seems determined to play the most dangerous of games. With no majority for her deal, instead of finding common ground with others, she will look for technical fudge in the EU and delay the vote to a point where she will claim that there is no alternative to back her deal.
She wants to force her medicine down the neck of the Commons and the country. She is so convinced that she alone is right she will not stop or work with others. The Tories should have got rid of her when they had the chance.
Off her trolley.
just finished Civil War malc. I had seen it before but back to back its a lot more enjoyable
Morning Alan, definitely one of my favourites. Must get it again and also long time since I watched World at War , it was superb as well.
That’s one of the better ideas I have heard amid a slurry of utter shite. Congratulations to these individuals for creative thinking while all around continue to bang their heads against walls.
May seems determined to play the most dangerous of games. With no majority for her deal, instead of finding common ground with others, she will look for technical fudge in the EU and delay the vote to a point where she will claim that there is no alternative to back her deal.
She wants to force her medicine down the neck of the Commons and the country. She is so convinced that she alone is right she will not stop or work with others. The Tories should have got rid of her when they had the chance.
And replaced her with who exactly? In the kingdom of the trickless, the one-trick pony is queen.
I heard him after the vote.. He is another piece of work who thinks a lot more of himself that the rest of us. Soames is spot on.
I get he's upset and still intending to rebel, but it makes no sense for him to whine like a baby because Tory party rules don't put a rule in that x voting against is enough even without a majority.
JRM just doesn't sound statesmanlike. He seems to believe he is, and thinks he is authoritative, but the manner and tone in which he speaks appears utterly condescending.
Labour are conducting themselves very professionally in the commons. A good sign for what a Labour govt might be like
Why? They are of unified purpose opposing on this issue, that doesn't happen on every issue. You might as well claim the last piece of legislation the gov passed shows they are being professional.
Given the amount of press he gets and his background, he’s on thin ice with media hungry, busted flush accusations. But self-awareness never seems to have been his strength.
Duncan-Smith remains a fool.
Campbell is a rude self important bully; every time he comes on the media the Remain cause takes a hit from the appalling impression he creates.
So far, Mrs May has said there are three choices - her deal, no deal or no Brexit - and used the threat of no deal on Remainers and No Brexit on Leavers.
Will she:
1) narrow that down to two choices - no deal or her deal - by running down the clock and putting pressure on Remainers by leaving no time or scope for second referendum legislation
or
2) narrow that down to two choices - no brexit or her deal - by warming up the prospect of a second referendum or extension of A50 (now safe from a VNOC) putting pressure on Leavers.
Given the amount of press he gets and his background, he’s on thin ice with media hungry, busted flush accusations. But self-awareness never seems to have been his strength.
Duncan-Smith remains a fool.
Campbell is a rude self important bully; every time he comes on the media the Remain cause takes a hit from the appalling impression he creates.
Yes, he seems never to have worked out that such an attitude worked only when he had government patronage to back it up.
That’s one of the better ideas I have heard amid a slurry of utter shite. Congratulations to these individuals for creative thinking while all around continue to bang their heads against walls.
That makes no sense. If all indicative votes on options for Brexit fail, you can’t randomly and arbitrarily reject 2 of them, which are both entirely consistent with the referendum result, in an arbitrary whim. That’s not representative democracy at all. It’s not even democracy. If they all fail, you have a general election and campaign for a new mandate, or no deal happens by passage of time.
No deal is already legislated for in the EU Withdrawal Act 2017, any deal or other option that changes that status quo needs to be legislated for between now and 29th March.
A single vote in the Commons can’t stop no deal, no matter how much those wishing that outcome think it can. I’m not even sure that most of the MPs have yet realised they’re not going to get a single day off in Q1 next year. There’s going to be a *lot* of bills to pass.
As I asked before, though, might it be possible for a PM to revoke A50 pre March 29, and Parliament to legislate afterwards ?
I imagine that the Supreme Court would rule, as they did in Miller, that actions that would repeal legislation can’t be taken purely by the Executive and require primary legislation to be legal. Hence the two-line bill that became the EU (Notification of Withdrawal) Act 2017.
I also imagine that @Scott_P will disagree with me.
It will probably be referred to the SC by someone whatever happens, if for any reason the government suggests revoking A50.
Then of course there’s the political fallout from overturning the referendum result, but that’s a question for another day.
But the SC would take some time to hear the case; how might they do so had Parliament legislated in the meantime ?
They were pretty quick to hear Miller, as was the ECJ with the A50 case.
I can’t see any legal (as opposed to political) issue with the government revoking A50 after first legislating for it and passing a Bill into law, given that the ECJ ruled we can do so unilaterally - but IANAL.
I don't think there's any doubt now that if Parliament were to pass a bill overturning the 2016 result, authorising the PM to withdraw A50 *and* repealing all the legislation passed to implement it, that it would be accepted.
But - and now we're into the realm of deep hypothetical where PB is best - if May were to bring forward such a bill, would Labour back it?
If a general election were forced on her at short notice, that might change, but that must be firmly odds against - maybe a 1 in 10 shot.
The key question there is whether the headbangers are willing to bring down their own Government to prevent the current deal.
I think many of them would
The sensible thing for them to do would be to keep their heads down and find a way of supporting the deal. But their stock has fallen so low that they may think they have little to lose by instead doubling down.
Yes and being secure for a year from no confidence votes and having said she will not lead the Tories at another general election May can focus on her legacy and getting her Deal through at all costs after a few tweaks, even threatening Eurosceptics with a Deal v Remain referendum if she has to
Heck of a risky strategy but this is going to escalate, as May cannot get what she wants without getting labour votes and while chaos leading to no deal default the ERG cannot confirm it without purposefully infighting more chaos.
How on Earth does a couple of streets of fake building facades cost £90m? Are they relocating Eastenders to Mayfair?
Who the fuck cares? There are more important things to worry about in the world.
Considering I'm taxed via the TV licence to pay for this garbage whether I watch it or not then I care.
Privatise the BBC and I couldn't give a hoot.
I loathe EastEnders, it’s awful, but I suspect it more than washes its face in terms of global syndication. Have you run the numbers? Or just another knee jerk anti BBC thing?
So far, Mrs May has said there are three choices - her deal, no deal or no Brexit - and used the threat of no deal on Remainers and No Brexit on Leavers.
Will she:
1) narrow that down to two choices - no deal or her deal - by running down the clock and putting pressure on Remainers by leaving no time or scope for second referendum legislation
or
2) narrow that down to two choices - no brexit or her deal - by warming up the prospect of a second referendum or extension of A50 (now safe from a VNOC) putting pressure on Leavers.
The problem with 1) is I'm sure it has been mentioned that the EU would offer an extension in the case of a second referendum. The 2nd reffers can afford for it to happen late in the day.
Yes - because she is fighting tooth and nail to get her deal agreed, and if it ever is the DUP will end her premiership. Her sense of duty may be misplaced or wrong, and she has taken pointless self preserving actions like pulling the MV, but passing the deal does not optimize her staying on as PM.
We don't know that they'd end her premiership. They *say* they'd vote her government down, but that doesn't mean they would. Plus, if they forced an election, she'd still be PM, and she might win the resulting election.
And say she wasn't trying to pass her deal: What's the alternative plan that would keep her in office? Crashing out without a deal would also end her premiership. And at least until yeasterday, being seen to back any of the remainier options (Norway+-?#&#"$#!, People's Vote etc) would certainly have ended her premiership.
That’s one of the better ideas I have heard amid a slurry of utter shite. Congratulations to these individuals for creative thinking while all around continue to bang their heads against walls.
Agree - that's the best idea I have heard so far as well. At least versus the other nightmare options.
How on Earth does a couple of streets of fake building facades cost £90m? Are they relocating Eastenders to Mayfair?
Who the fuck cares? There are more important things to worry about in the world.
Considering I'm taxed via the TV licence to pay for this garbage whether I watch it or not then I care.
Privatise the BBC and I couldn't give a hoot.
I loathe EastEnders, it’s awful, but I suspect it more than washes its face in terms of global syndication. Have you run the numbers? Or just another knee jerk anti BBC thing?
Have you run the numbers? It's certainly no Top Gear. And in any case, what difference does that make to the BBC managing to spend £90m on a set for a f****** soap? It's hardly Game of Thrones, is it?
How on Earth does a couple of streets of fake building facades cost £90m? Are they relocating Eastenders to Mayfair?
I *guess* the problem is having to do it around existing filming schedules - ISTR (*) they had to do the rebuild in the same location as the 'original' sets.
Performing big upgrades whilst maintaining operations is difficult and can be very costly. As the railways have discovered ...
(*) It might have been Coronation Street ...
That would make sense, yes it’s going to be really expensive if they have to work three days at a time while leaving the set looking identical every time they finish.
Yes, I have bad memories of the WCML upgrade project, which managed to cause massive disturbance at the same time as running way late and way over budget. With hindsight they would have been much better having the guts to close it completely for a year and do all the works in one go.
ISTR Coronation St rebuilt their entire set at a new location, and as the area around the old Granada Studios became trendy they made a fortune selling it off.
Closing the whole line and getting the work done is what they usually do here in Denmark - last year one of the main commuter lines into Copenhagen was shut for months while they relaid all the track etc - busses laid on every 10 minutes or so - massive disruption but for a relatively short period - unlike no deal Brexit, massive disruption for a very very long period for no benefit.
NIce article Alan - you do know what the definition of insanity is, don't you?
Why on earth would the government decide now to "come clean" and tell us all about the pros and cons of immigration?
Also, would need to do some research on the "made no serious effort to accommodate its biggest ever increase in population". Is that really so?
MrT thanks
Im currently waging a ( losing ) campaign to offer a few divergences from Brexit. Since out there in the big world things go on and will eventually come back to bite us. The current introspection on UK problems doesnt really pick up how similar our issues are to lots of other countries. Somewhere along the line we need to get back a sense of perspective. Brexit has made Westminster as functional as Stormont.
So far, Mrs May has said there are three choices - her deal, no deal or no Brexit - and used the threat of no deal on Remainers and No Brexit on Leavers.
Will she:
1) narrow that down to two choices - no deal or her deal - by running down the clock and putting pressure on Remainers by leaving no time or scope for second referendum legislation
or
2) narrow that down to two choices - no brexit or her deal - by warming up the prospect of a second referendum or extension of A50 (now safe from a VNOC) putting pressure on Leavers.
The problem with 1) is I'm sure it has been mentioned that the EU would offer an extension in the case of a second referendum. The 2nd reffers can afford for it to happen late in the day.
I think she would prefer option 2) because it is less risky (no crash out) and she could live with either result (her deal or no Brexit). It also likely to be a more effective squeeze as it would be supported by all other parties (except DUP). But if she goes for an extension of A50, the EU will not grant it for further can kicking. It must come with a GE or 2nd referendum. She could always revoke A50 but that seems unlikely.
The private sector must (on average) be getting real wage rises, as in the public sector we are continuing to get real terms wage cuts each year. Minus 2% for me.
shall we talk about pensions ?
One reason that I am keen to claim mine! If I take early retirement this year then I get CPI rises each year.
One of many reasons why retention of senior staff is so poor. The finances make it foolish to stay in the job.
I cashed mine in and kept working , suppose you will not have that option.
No, that is definitely an option. I just need to be off work for a month before restarting, with salary, pension and 13.5% payrise as no longer contributing employee superannuation. It would mean a lot of tax though unless i go to 3 days a week, which would put me in status quo for income, more or less.
Comments
The clause says "The European Communities Act 1972 is repealed on exit day."
If we revoke Article 50, there is no exit day, and the clause can never be put into effect
Yesterday was a day of tumult, with an astonishing result.
My bets finished in the green. May did win, so that failed, but backing 100-149 at 3 came off (a similar bet for a higher band against May failed). Ahead overall, though.
It's a bit like the time he got confused and walked past all those empty seats to make a video about how crowded the train was. Or the time he got muddled over where he was laying a wreath and instead of laying it at a memorial to victims of Mossad laid it on the grave of a mass murderer.
If the DUP are on board, this is Game On.
I also imagine that @Scott_P will disagree with me.
It will probably be referred to the SC by someone whatever happens, if for any reason the government suggests revoking A50.
Then of course there’s the political fallout from overturning the referendum result, but that’s a question for another day.
I think this is just stirring to keep the pressure on Theresa May. Bad politics, though. The quickest way to ensure the DUP won't support Labour at all (and I would remind everyone that if the abstain on a confidence motion the Tories would almost certainly win) is to look as though you're taking them for granted.
"He wants to force his medicine down the neck of the Commons and the country. He is so convinced that he alone is right he will not stop or work with others. ...... Labour should have got rid of him when they had the chance"
Mind you, compared to the Conservatives...but that's like saying somebody is more loyal than Mark Reckless.
Which would matter so much less if they were not all so tragically, disastrously wrong.
Have a good morning.
Jezza fancies an early election, but the moderates do too. Best have it on old boundaries without reselections.
It could be that the passing of time makes no-Brexit impossible, so Labour MPs will have to decide if it’s deal or no deal.
It could also be that something changes that makes it deal or remain/extend A50, at which point those in favour of no deal need to decide whether to back the deal over no brexit.
(And also of course everyone knew what was going to happen and a transfer of power had been quietly settled in advance between Baldwin, MacDonald and Asquith.)
TTFN.
Soames is a pompous windbag of no great intellect. JRM needs to find something he can organise in a brewery. He and his ERG chums have been shown to be pretty second rate compared to the likes of Dominic Grieve whose interventions on Brexit have been clinical and highly successful. The fact that Soames and JRM are Tory MPs says more about the poverty of Tory candidate selection than anything else.
Sadly, though, as a Leaver, I don’t share Grieve’s opinions or views. Shame there is no one of his ability in the Leave camp.
One of many reasons why retention of senior staff is so poor. The finances make it foolish to stay in the job.
Performing big upgrades whilst maintaining operations is difficult and can be very costly. As the railways have discovered ...
(*) It might have been Coronation Street ...
In a break this week from correcting every piece of journalism ever written by carole cadwalladr, we have an update on the DUP. We would like to set the record straight. In the past we may have referred to them as backwards, bigoted reactionary extremists with fascists tendencies. We would like to make clear that the DUP are now part of the People’s movement, and share our values on social justice, and improvements to knee cap surgeries. We stand in solidarity with them.
Given the shellacking private sector pensions and wages have had we'd love to share your pain :-)
If that is anything close to the truth then May’s gross negligence in failing to prepare for a no deal Brexit is even more inexplicable. No deal would be chaotic now for the first few years because of lack of planning and infrastructure investment and that will be criminal if it was always the fall back position.
Personally, I don’t think parliament will ever let that happen.
Yes, Dr Wollaston is trouble. So was Doug Carswell to UKIP, but he served his purpose well.
He gets there only if (a) he defeats Theresa May at a general election or (b) if he successfully gets a vote of no confidence in the government andgets to form a government of his own, and before the Conservatives replace Theresa May.
Theresa May more or less ruled out leading the Conservatives into the next general election to her MPs yesterday (though in my view that was not new news). If a general election were forced on her at short notice, that might change, but that must be firmly odds against - maybe a 1 in 10 shot. If it were forced on her, the Tories would presumably be poorly placed and would have maybe a 1 in 4 chance of forming the next government. So that's a 7.5% chance all round that Jeremy Corbyn gets to be next Prime Minister that way.
The maths of the current Parliament are such that without a major realignment Jeremy Corbyn is only going to form a minority government in unusual circumstances. The atmosphere is febrile but I can't make it more than a 1 in 20 shot at present that that happens before the Conservatives replace Theresa May. Even if there is a major realignment, he might well not be the beneficiary of it. It's not as though his own MPs like him much. So that's another 5%.
Totting that up, I make that 12.5%, or a 7/1 shot. Does that feel about right to others?
Yes, I have bad memories of the WCML upgrade project, which managed to cause massive disturbance at the same time as running way late and way over budget. With hindsight they would have been much better having the guts to close it completely for a year and do all the works in one go.
ISTR Coronation St rebuilt their entire set at a new location, and as the area around the old Granada Studios became trendy they made a fortune selling it off.
I think many of them would
Duncan-Smith remains a fool.
Corbyn's do nothing strategy is not necessarily the vote winner you imagine it might be.
https://twitter.com/BloomfieldSJ/status/1066774213376258048?fbclid=IwAR0npiUCWSAWsO671vqussQlofiu7afXzQqNm0XDsw0LWfRjtijGNYL0uaw
I can’t see any legal (as opposed to political) issue with the government revoking A50 after first legislating for it and passing a Bill into law, given that the ECJ ruled we can do so unilaterally - but IANAL.
May can either try winding down the clock and daring Remainers not to back her rubbish deal, or threaten a second referendum, which would lose many Remainers but perhaps persuade some Leavers to back it.
The numbers for her deal, though, were abysmal.
Will she:
1) narrow that down to two choices - no deal or her deal - by running down the clock and putting pressure on Remainers by leaving no time or scope for second referendum legislation
or
2) narrow that down to two choices - no brexit or her deal - by warming up the prospect of a second referendum or extension of A50 (now safe from a VNOC) putting pressure on Leavers.
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/12/12/national-enquirers-deal-imperil-trump-1061792
Which is far more consequential than any headline including the National Enquirer might sound.
Still, at least he can call them out as fake news....
Who the fuck cares? There are more important things to worry about in the world.
Why on earth would the government decide now to "come clean" and tell us all about the pros and cons of immigration?
Also, would need to do some research on the "made no serious effort to accommodate its biggest ever increase in population". Is that really so?
Privatise the BBC and I couldn't give a hoot.
But - and now we're into the realm of deep hypothetical where PB is best - if May were to bring forward such a bill, would Labour back it?
And say she wasn't trying to pass her deal: What's the alternative plan that would keep her in office? Crashing out without a deal would also end her premiership. And at least until yeasterday, being seen to back any of the remainier options (Norway+-?#&#"$#!, People's Vote etc) would certainly have ended her premiership.
Im currently waging a ( losing ) campaign to offer a few divergences from Brexit. Since out there in the big world things go on and will eventually come back to bite us. The current introspection on UK problems doesnt really pick up how similar our issues are to lots of other countries. Somewhere along the line we need to get back a sense of perspective. Brexit has made Westminster as functional as Stormont.