How about a motion that "in view of the Government's proposed withdrawal agreement, this House has no confidence in the prime minister"? How about it, Jeremy Corbyn? Take the initiative.
If I recall correctly, there's a traditional Parliamentary technique for it - a motion to reduce the salary of the Minister by £1. Technically this has no effect (apart from the missing pound) but it's a symbol for "resign!".
Time for someone to make that move I think, there must be a good chance that some of the ERG would support a no confidence against May personally rather than the government as a whole.
May has reached the end of the road, she is blocking any moves forward by her pretence that the cadaver that is her deal is still alive and kicking. If she won't move on from that position, and she won't, then she must be pushed out of the way.
There are reports TMay "threatened" the EU yesterday that if they didn't improve the backstop offer, she would take her Deal - which is also their deal - and crash it, deliberately: i.e. put it to parliament, next week, knowing it would be defeated.
Quite how that is a "threat" I dunno.
Anyhow I don't see how she can hold on until January 21. Once the last hangover has cleared on January 2nd No Deal will loom very large, and Something Will Snap.
I agree. May would look completely absurd if she went to the Commons and recommended it to crash the deal that she said "with all my heart " last week was the best way forward. Persons in grey suits, or perhaps white coats, would be summoned forthwith.
Reminds me of Tsipras's speech to the Greek Parliament after he caved to the EU, where he stood and said he didn't agree with the plans he was putting forward and he didn't think they would help, but they had no choice. And it worked!
How about a motion that "in view of the Government's proposed withdrawal agreement, this House has no confidence in the prime minister"? How about it, Jeremy Corbyn? Take the initiative.
If I recall correctly, there's a traditional Parliamentary technique for it - a motion to reduce the salary of the Minister by £1. Technically this has no effect (apart from the missing pound) but it's a symbol for "resign!".
Time for someone to make that move I think, there must be a good chance that some of the ERG would support a no confidence against May personally rather than the government as a whole.
May has reached the end of the road, she is blocking any moves forward by her pretence that the cadaver that is her deal is still alive and kicking. If she won't move on from that position, and she won't, then she must be pushed out of the way.
If there were a single grown up person who had a clue what they were doing and principles that I could buy into, I'd say bring it on.
Mr. T, inertia and stubbornness on her part, versus cowardice, ambition, division, and unwillingness on the other.
But, we'll see.
I think we will see something on the lines that I hoped for, on this site, a few days back. A Free Vote in the Commons for each of the four options:
1. No Deal 2. Revoke 3. Referendum 4. The Deal
Every MP will have to examine his or her conscience, and the views and prosperity of his or her constituents - and of the country - and vote accordingly. No hiding place, no abstaining, no running away. Then HMG will act on the views of the Commons.
In the FT they are saying that Liam Fox has come out in favour of this process, the so called "indicative vote". That seems significant.
And it is the only possible way out of the mess, at the moment, unless and until someone has a better idea.
Seems sensible to properly gauge the mood of the commons. Why this isn't done now, rather than after Christmas, eludes me.
How about a motion that "in view of the Government's proposed withdrawal agreement, this House has no confidence in the prime minister"? How about it, Jeremy Corbyn? Take the initiative.
If I recall correctly, there's a traditional Parliamentary technique for it - a motion to reduce the salary of the Minister by £1. Technically this has no effect (apart from the missing pound) but it's a symbol for "resign!".
Time for someone to make that move I think, there must be a good chance that some of the ERG would support a no confidence against May personally rather than the government as a whole.
May has reached the end of the road, she is blocking any moves forward by her pretence that the cadaver that is her deal is still alive and kicking. If she won't move on from that position, and she won't, then she must be pushed out of the way.
If there were a single grown up person who had a clue what they were doing and principles that I could buy into, I'd say bring it on.
So Dominic Grieve for PM?
Grieve? No. He's not a grown up he's an absolute fanatic who will take any action no matter the cost because he thinks it is a moral mission. He's the flip side of the ERG, he just has more brains and better judgement on when to strike. There has to be someone, leaver or remainer, who is more grown up.
How about a motion that "in view of the Government's proposed withdrawal agreement, this House has no confidence in the prime minister"? How about it, Jeremy Corbyn? Take the initiative.
If I recall correctly, there's a traditional Parliamentary technique for it - a motion to reduce the salary of the Minister by £1. Technically this has no effect (apart from the missing pound) but it's a symbol for "resign!".
Time for someone to make that move I think, there must be a good chance that some of the ERG would support a no confidence against May personally rather than the government as a whole.
May has reached the end of the road, she is blocking any moves forward by her pretence that the cadaver that is her deal is still alive and kicking. If she won't move on from that position, and she won't, then she must be pushed out of the way.
There are reports TMay "threatened" the EU yesterday that if they didn't improve the backstop offer, she would take her Deal - which is also their deal - and crash it, deliberately: i.e. put it to parliament, next week, knowing it would be defeated.
Quite how that is a "threat" I dunno.
Anyhow I don't see how she can hold on until January 21. Once the last hangover has cleared on January 2nd No Deal will loom very large, and Something Will Snap.
I agree. May would look completely absurd if she went to the Commons and recommended it to crash the deal that she said "with all my heart " last week was the best way forward. Persons in grey suits, or perhaps white coats, would be summoned forthwith.
Reminds me of Tsipras's speech to the Greek Parliament after he caved to the EU, where he stood and said he didn't agree with the plans he was putting forward and he didn't think they would help, but they had no choice. And it worked!
The Greek parliament had two choices, the deal or Armageddon. We have three, the deal, Armageddon or revoking article 50. And when the chips are down I think Parliament will vote to revoke.
How about a motion that "in view of the Government's proposed withdrawal agreement, this House has no confidence in the prime minister"? How about it, Jeremy Corbyn? Take the initiative.
If I recall correctly, there's a traditional Parliamentary technique for it - a motion to reduce the salary of the Minister by £1. Technically this has no effect (apart from the missing pound) but it's a symbol for "resign!".
Time for someone to make that move I think, there must be a good chance that some of the ERG would support a no confidence against May personally rather than the government as a whole.
May has reached the end of the road, she is blocking any moves forward by her pretence that the cadaver that is her deal is still alive and kicking. If she won't move on from that position, and she won't, then she must be pushed out of the way.
There are reports TMay "threatened" the EU yesterday that if they didn't improve the backstop offer, she would take her Deal - which is also their deal - and crash it, deliberately: i.e. put it to parliament, next week, knowing it would be defeated.
Quite how that is a "threat" I dunno.
Anyhow I don't see how she can hold on until January 21. Once the last hangover has cleared on January 2nd No Deal will loom very large, and Something Will Snap.
I agree. May would look completely absurd if she went to the Commons and recommended it to crash the deal that she said "with all my heart " last week was the best way forward. Persons in grey suits, or perhaps white coats, would be summoned forthwith.
Reminds me of Tsipras's speech to the Greek Parliament after he caved to the EU, where he stood and said he didn't agree with the plans he was putting forward and he didn't think they would help, but they had no choice. And it worked!
The Greek parliament had two choices, the deal or Armageddon. We have three, the deal, Armageddon or revoking article 50. And when the chips are down I think Parliament will vote to revoke.
So do I. It's why I don't think May can just wait for 3 months, she has to try to force an option in early January.
Mr. T, inertia and stubbornness on her part, versus cowardice, ambition, division, and unwillingness on the other.
But, we'll see.
I think we will see something on the lines that I hoped for, on this site, a few days back. A Free Vote in the Commons for each of the four options:
1. No Deal 2. Revoke 3. Referendum 4. The Deal
Every MP will have to examine his or her conscience, and the views and prosperity of his or her constituents - and of the country - and vote accordingly. No hiding place, no abstaining, no running away. Then HMG will act on the views of the Commons.
In the FT they are saying that Liam Fox has come out in favour of this process, the so called "indicative vote". That seems significant.
And it is the only possible way out of the mess, at the moment, unless and until someone has a better idea.
That is a long way of saying there should be a referendum.
Which is quite a turnaround from someone who voted for this shitshow and has mostly been irrationally pro-Brexit thereafter.
Mr. T, inertia and stubbornness on her part, versus cowardice, ambition, division, and unwillingness on the other.
But, we'll see.
I think we will see something on the lines that I hoped for, on this site, a few days back. A Free Vote in the Commons for each of the four options:
1. No Deal 2. Revoke 3. Referendum 4. The Deal
Every MP will have to examine his or her conscience, and the views and prosperity of his or her constituents - and of the country - and vote accordingly. No hiding place, no abstaining, no running away. Then HMG will act on the views of the Commons.
In the FT they are saying that Liam Fox has come out in favour of this process, the so called "indicative vote". That seems significant.
And it is the only possible way out of the mess, at the moment, unless and until someone has a better idea.
Seems sensible to properly gauge the mood of the commons. Why this isn't done now, rather than after Christmas, eludes me.
Because Mrs May wants to give the can another kick?
Evening all. My family's view on how to play Monopoly is a straightforward one: don't.
it does seem to go on a lot longer when I have played it recently than I remember it ever doing as a child.
It’s a board game for people who don’t like board games, and won’t help to change their minds.
Indeed. It's a poor game because the strategy is easy and one-dimensional (buy almost everything on which you land) and depends thereafter on luck, and it becomes obvious an hour or so in who is going to win, but you have to go through two hours' more pain before arriving at that conclusion. Although most people I know give up long before there is a single winner.
There are some brilliant board games on the market - mostly devised by Germans, it has to be said - where there are multiple ways to try and win, there is a good balance between skill and luck, and where the eventual winner isn't obvious until the final turn. Go DYOR.
Ticket to Ride, Pit Crew, Flamme Rouge, Codenames. Easy family games.
How about a motion that "in view of the Government's proposed withdrawal agreement, this House has no confidence in the prime minister"? How about it, Jeremy Corbyn? Take the initiative.
If I recall correctly, there's a traditional Parliamentary technique for it - a motion to reduce the salary of the Minister by £1. Technically this has no effect (apart from the missing pound) but it's a symbol for "resign!".
Time for someone to make that move I think, there must be a good chance that some of the ERG would support a no confidence against May personally rather than the government as a whole.
May has reached the end of the road, she is blocking any moves forward by her pretence that the cadaver that is her deal is still alive and kicking. If she won't move on from that position, and she won't, then she must be pushed out of the way.
There are reports TMay "threatened" the EU yesterday that if they didn't improve the backstop offer, she would take her Deal - which is also their deal - and crash it, deliberately: i.e. put it to parliament, next week, knowing it would be defeated.
Quite how that is a "threat" I dunno.
Anyhow I don't see how she can hold on until January 21. Once the last hangover has cleared on January 2nd No Deal will loom very large, and Something Will Snap.
I agree. May would look completely absurd if she went to the Commons and recommended it to crash the deal that she said "with all my heart " last week was the best way forward. Persons in grey suits, or perhaps white coats, would be summoned forthwith.
Reminds me of Tsipras's speech to the Greek Parliament after he caved to the EU, where he stood and said he didn't agree with the plans he was putting forward and he didn't think they would help, but they had no choice. And it worked!
The Greek parliament had two choices, the deal or Armageddon. We have three, the deal, Armageddon or revoking article 50. And when the chips are down I think Parliament will vote to revoke.
So do I. It's why I don't think May can just wait for 3 months, she has to try to force an option in early January.
I suspect May has given up on trying to force anything, and is waiting to see in which direction she will be forced.
Evening all. My family's view on how to play Monopoly is a straightforward one: don't.
it does seem to go on a lot longer when I have played it recently than I remember it ever doing as a child.
It’s a board game for people who don’t like board games, and won’t help to change their minds.
Indeed. It's a poor game because the strategy is easy and one-dimensional (buy almost everything on which you land) and depends thereafter on luck, and it becomes obvious an hour or so in who is going to win, but you have to go through two hours' more pain before arriving at that conclusion. Although most people I know give up long before there is a single winner.
There are some brilliant board games on the market - mostly devised by Germans, it has to be said - where there are multiple ways to try and win, there is a good balance between skill and luck, and where the eventual winner isn't obvious until the final turn. Go DYOR.
Mr. T, inertia and stubbornness on her part, versus cowardice, ambition, division, and unwillingness on the other.
But, we'll see.
I think we will see something on the lines that I hoped for, on this site, a few days back. A Free Vote in the Commons for each of the four options:
1. No Deal 2. Revoke 3. Referendum 4. The Deal
Every MP will have to examine his or her conscience, and the views and prosperity of his or her constituents - and of the country - and vote accordingly. No hiding place, no abstaining, no running away. Then HMG will act on the views of the Commons.
In the FT they are saying that Liam Fox has come out in favour of this process, the so called "indicative vote". That seems significant.
And it is the only possible way out of the mess, at the moment, unless and until someone has a better idea.
Seems sensible to properly gauge the mood of the commons. Why this isn't done now, rather than after Christmas, eludes me.
Because Mrs May wants to give the can another kick?
She and Corbyn, in different ways for different reasons, are still trying to make it seem like some options are available when realistically they are not. I suspect she needs time to canvass the Cabinet to try to bodge a plan B to get most of them on board before she holds the MV in January.
Evening all. My family's view on how to play Monopoly is a straightforward one: don't.
it does seem to go on a lot longer when I have played it recently than I remember it ever doing as a child.
It’s a board game for people who don’t like board games, and won’t help to change their minds.
Indeed. It's a poor game because the strategy is easy and one-dimensional (buy almost everything on which you land) and depends thereafter on luck, and it becomes obvious an hour or so in who is going to win, but you have to go through two hours' more pain before arriving at that conclusion. Although most people I know give up long before there is a single winner.
There are some brilliant board games on the market - mostly devised by Germans, it has to be said - where there are multiple ways to try and win, there is a good balance between skill and luck, and where the eventual winner isn't obvious until the final turn. Go DYOR.
How about a motion that "in view of the Government's proposed withdrawal agreement, this House has no confidence in the prime minister"? How about it, Jeremy Corbyn? Take the initiative.
If I recall correctly, there's a traditional Parliamentary technique for it - a motion to reduce the salary of the Minister by £1. Technically this has no effect (apart from the missing pound) but it's a symbol for "resign!".
Time for someone to make that move I think, there must be a good chance that some of the ERG would support a no confidence against May personally rather than the government as a whole.
May has reached the end of the road, she is blocking any moves forward by her pretence that the cadaver that is her deal is still alive and kicking. If she won't move on from that position, and she won't, then she must be pushed out of the way.
There are reports TMay "threatened" the EU yesterday that if they didn't improve the backstop offer, she would take her Deal - which is also their deal - and crash it, deliberately: i.e. put it to parliament, next week, knowing it would be defeated.
Quite how that is a "threat" I dunno.
Anyhow I don't see how she can hold on until January 21. Once the last hangover has cleared on January 2nd No Deal will loom very large, and Something Will Snap.
I agree. May would look completely absurd if she went to the Commons and recommended it to crash the deal that she said "with all my heart " last week was the best way forward. Persons in grey suits, or perhaps white coats, would be summoned forthwith.
Reminds me of Tsipras's speech to the Greek Parliament after he caved to the EU, where he stood and said he didn't agree with the plans he was putting forward and he didn't think they would help, but they had no choice. And it worked!
The Greek parliament had two choices, the deal or Armageddon. We have three, the deal, Armageddon or revoking article 50. And when the chips are down I think Parliament will vote to revoke.
If wishes were kisses, then take that tongue from my throat. It’s possible that they will but there is little evidence to date to justify your assumption.
Evening all. My family's view on how to play Monopoly is a straightforward one: don't.
it does seem to go on a lot longer when I have played it recently than I remember it ever doing as a child.
It’s a board game for people who don’t like board games, and won’t help to change their minds.
Indeed. It's a poor game because the strategy is easy and one-dimensional (buy almost everything on which you land) and depends thereafter on luck, and it becomes obvious an hour or so in who is going to win, but you have to go through two hours' more pain before arriving at that conclusion. Although most people I know give up long before there is a single winner.
There are some brilliant board games on the market - mostly devised by Germans, it has to be said - where there are multiple ways to try and win, there is a good balance between skill and luck, and where the eventual winner isn't obvious until the final turn. Go DYOR.
May I suggest chess?
Not reliant enough on luck! I need a chance to win at least.
Evening all. My family's view on how to play Monopoly is a straightforward one: don't.
it does seem to go on a lot longer when I have played it recently than I remember it ever doing as a child.
It’s a board game for people who don’t like board games, and won’t help to change their minds.
Indeed. It's a poor game because the strategy is easy and one-dimensional (buy almost everything on which you land) and depends thereafter on luck, and it becomes obvious an hour or so in who is going to win, but you have to go through two hours' more pain before arriving at that conclusion. Although most people I know give up long before there is a single winner.
There are some brilliant board games on the market - mostly devised by Germans, it has to be said - where there are multiple ways to try and win, there is a good balance between skill and luck, and where the eventual winner isn't obvious until the final turn. Go DYOR.
May I suggest chess?
The suggestion of a family implies non-virginal status. So not chess.
Evening all. My family's view on how to play Monopoly is a straightforward one: don't.
it does seem to go on a lot longer when I have played it recently than I remember it ever doing as a child.
It’s a board game for people who don’t like board games, and won’t help to change their minds.
Indeed. It's a poor game because the strategy is easy and one-dimensional (buy almost everything on which you land) and depends thereafter on luck, and it becomes obvious an hour or so in who is going to win, but you have to go through two hours' more pain before arriving at that conclusion. Although most people I know give up long before there is a single winner.
There are some brilliant board games on the market - mostly devised by Germans, it has to be said - where there are multiple ways to try and win, there is a good balance between skill and luck, and where the eventual winner isn't obvious until the final turn. Go DYOR.
May I suggest chess?
Not reliant enough on luck! I need a chance to win at least.
There's a good deal more luck in chess than many imagine, but generally the better player does win.
How about a motion that "in view of the Government's proposed withdrawal agreement, this House has no confidence in the prime minister"? How about it, Jeremy Corbyn? Take the initiative.
If I recall correctly, there's a traditional Parliamentary technique for it - a motion to reduce the salary of the Minister by £1. Technically this has no effect (apart from the missing pound) but it's a symbol for "resign!".
.
There are reports TMay "threatened" the EU yesterday that if they didn't improve the backstop offer, she would take her Deal - which is also their deal - and crash it, deliberately: i.e. put it to parliament, next week, knowing it would be defeated.
Quite how that is a "threat" I dunno.
Anyhow I don't see how she can hold on until January 21. Once the last hangover has cleared on January 2nd No Deal will loom very large, and Something Will Snap.
I agree. May would look completely absurd if she went to the Commons and recommended it to crash the deal that she said "with all my heart " last week was the best way forward. Persons in grey suits, or perhaps white coats, would be summoned forthwith.
Reminds me of Tsipras's speech to the Greek Parliament after he caved to the EU, where he stood and said he didn't agree with the plans he was putting forward and he didn't think they would help, but they had no choice. And it worked!
The Greek parliament had two choices, the deal or Armageddon. We have three, the deal, Armageddon or revoking article 50. And when the chips are down I think Parliament will vote to revoke.
So do I. It's why I don't think May can just wait for 3 months, she has to try to force an option in early January.
I suspect May has given up on trying to force anything, and is waiting to see in which direction she will be forced.
Why would she change the habit of a lifetime? She is not a leader in terms of articulating a vision but a technocratic manager. We need leaders with vision, the ability to articulate that vision and the metal to take unpopular decisions.
I read an interesting article in one of the papers claiming David Lidington was her likely successor as he was her deputy in all but name, while he may have great qualities I don't think we need another void as PM!
Evening all. My family's view on how to play Monopoly is a straightforward one: don't.
it does seem to go on a lot longer when I have played it recently than I remember it ever doing as a child.
It’s a board game for people who don’t like board games, and won’t help to change their minds.
Indeed. It's a poor game because the strategy is easy and one-dimensional (buy almost everything on which you land) and depends thereafter on luck, and it becomes obvious an hour or so in who is going to win, but you have to go through two hours' more pain before arriving at that conclusion. Although most people I know give up long before there is a single winner.
There are some brilliant board games on the market - mostly devised by Germans, it has to be said - where there are multiple ways to try and win, there is a good balance between skill and luck, and where the eventual winner isn't obvious until the final turn. Go DYOR.
Ticket to Ride, Pit Crew, Flamme Rouge, Codenames. Easy family games.
True. And there are so many T2R variants on offer now, as well. Every one of my recent Xmas's has included several games. But for more dedicated gamers there is El Grande, 7Wonders, Terraforming Mars, Carcasonne and its many variants, Agricola and its sequels, Caverna, Puerto Rico, Navegador, Viticulture, Power Grid, the Dominion series of card games, Pandemic for an unusual team game, or even the enduring railway building games such as 1829 and its spinoffs. So many to choose from.
The 'build a cross party consensus for another referendum' option sounds too wholesome for this dark and troubled parliament. I can't see it. Neither can I see how a general election comes about. This leaves me looking at an appalling game of chicken as the clock runs down, Mrs May forcing Labour to choose between her Deal and No Deal, Labour if they hold their nerve and keep opposing forcing her to choose between No Deal and another referendum. The outcome then depends on who blinks. Who is the chicken. If it's Mrs May we get the referendum. If it's Labour we get the Deal. And if neither back down we get No Deal.
Evening all. My family's view on how to play Monopoly is a straightforward one: don't.
it does seem to go on a lot longer when I have played it recently than I remember it ever doing as a child.
It’s a board game for people who don’t like board games, and won’t help to change their minds.
Indeed. It's a poor game because the strategy is easy and one-dimensional (buy almost everything on which you land) and depends thereafter on luck, and it becomes obvious an hour or so in who is going to win, but you have to go through two hours' more pain before arriving at that conclusion. Although most people I know give up long before there is a single winner.
There are some brilliant board games on the market - mostly devised by Germans, it has to be said - where there are multiple ways to try and win, there is a good balance between skill and luck, and where the eventual winner isn't obvious until the final turn. Go DYOR.
May I suggest chess?
Not reliant enough on luck! I need a chance to win at least.
There's a good deal more luck in chess than many imagine, but generally the better player does win.
How so? Do you mean players unintentionally making good moves?
The 'build a cross party consensus for another referendum' option sounds too wholesome for this dark and troubled parliament. I can't see it. Neither can I see how a general election comes about. This leaves me looking at an appalling game of chicken as the clock runs down, Mrs May forcing Labour to choose between her Deal and No Deal, Labour if they hold their nerve and keep opposing forcing her to choose between No Deal and another referendum. The outcome then depends on who blinks. Who is the chicken. If it's Mrs May we get the referendum. If it's Labour we get the Deal. And if neither back down we get No Deal.
Labour will not back down on the deal, the potential costs to not even pretending they are trying to stop Brexit are too great. A referendum potentially offers May what she wants, so she would blink first, the question is how many more Cabinet Members would resign if she proposed it, depending on the question?
How many politicians have vision etc.? One might argue that Blair did but I’m not sure that Adventures in Mesopotamia is what you want. Other than that, I consider that he avoided anything approaching a hard decision. Brown, no. Major, again no, Cameron, possibly but not interested in unpopular decisions. Arguably Nick Clegg (yes, really) and look where that got him.
I’m unconvinced that the electorate respects, or at least will vote for, parties led by the people you describe.
The 'build a cross party consensus for another referendum' option sounds too wholesome for this dark and troubled parliament. I can't see it. Neither can I see how a general election comes about. This leaves me looking at an appalling game of chicken as the clock runs down, Mrs May forcing Labour to choose between her Deal and No Deal, Labour if they hold their nerve and keep opposing forcing her to choose between No Deal and another referendum. The outcome then depends on who blinks. Who is the chicken. If it's Mrs May we get the referendum. If it's Labour we get the Deal. And if neither back down we get No Deal.
The sad fact is that almost any option which begins 'Build a cross-party consensus for' would be a decent outcome, but is likely impossible due for the same reason.
Evening all. My family's view on how to play Monopoly is a straightforward one: don't.
it does seem to go on a lot longer when I have played it recently than I remember it ever doing as a child.
You were enjoying it, back then.
indeed. but entertainment options were more limited. only 3 TV channels for a start.
Yeah, my childhood memory is of playing family monopoly while the Great Escape was on TV after the Queen's Speech; when Steve McQueen got to the Swiss border the game would stop while we waited to see if this time he would make it over the wire. In my memory that was every Christmas but I suspect the reality of TV scheduling is that it didn't actually happen more than twice. And he got hung on the wire both times.
Evening all. My family's view on how to play Monopoly is a straightforward one: don't.
it does seem to go on a lot longer when I have played it recently than I remember it ever doing as a child.
It’s a board game for people who don’t like board games, and won’t help to change their minds.
Indeed. It's a poor game because the strategy is easy and one-dimensional (buy almost everything on which you land) and depends thereafter on luck, and it becomes obvious an hour or so in who is going to win, but you have to go through two hours' more pain before arriving at that conclusion. Although most people I know give up long before there is a single winner.
There are some brilliant board games on the market - mostly devised by Germans, it has to be said - where there are multiple ways to try and win, there is a good balance between skill and luck, and where the eventual winner isn't obvious until the final turn. Go DYOR.
Ticket to Ride, Pit Crew, Flamme Rouge, Codenames. Easy family games.
True. And there are so many T2R variants on offer now, as well. Every one of my recent Xmas's has included several games. But for more dedicated gamers there is El Grande, 7Wonders, Terraforming Mars, Carcasonne and its many variants, Agricola and its sequels, Caverna, Puerto Rico, Navegador, Viticulture, Power Grid, the Dominion series of card games, Pandemic for an unusual team game, or even the enduring railway building games such as 1829 and its spinoffs. So many to choose from.
1829 is, unfortunately, dross (or to be more charitable a prototype). 1830 AH is outstanding (particularly with the Reading expansion). Perhaps Europa Universalis by Azure Wish Edition....
How about a motion that "in view of the Government's proposed withdrawal agreement, this House has no confidence in the prime minister"? How about it, Jeremy Corbyn? Take the initiative.
If I recall correctly, there's a traditional Parliamentary technique for it - a motion to reduce the salary of the Minister by £1. Technically this has no effect (apart from the missing pound) but it's a symbol for "resign!".
Time for someone to make that move I think, there must be a good chance that some of the ERG would support a no confidence against May personally rather than the government as a whole.
May has reached the end of the road, she is blocking any moves forward by her pretence that the cadaver that is her deal is still alive and kicking. If she won't move on from that position, and she won't, then she must be pushed out of the way.
If there were a single grown up person who had a clue what they were doing and principles that I could buy into, I'd say bring it on.
So Dominic Grieve for PM?
Grieve? No. He's not a grown up he's an absolute fanatic who will take any action no matter the cost because he thinks it is a moral mission. He's the flip side of the ERG, he just has more brains and better judgement on when to strike. There has to be someone, leaver or remainer, who is more grown up.
Grieve? Better judgment? The guy who ended up voting against his own amendment? Leave it out.....
The 'build a cross party consensus for another referendum' option sounds too wholesome for this dark and troubled parliament. I can't see it. Neither can I see how a general election comes about. This leaves me looking at an appalling game of chicken as the clock runs down, Mrs May forcing Labour to choose between her Deal and No Deal, Labour if they hold their nerve and keep opposing forcing her to choose between No Deal and another referendum. The outcome then depends on who blinks. Who is the chicken. If it's Mrs May we get the referendum. If it's Labour we get the Deal. And if neither back down we get No Deal.
Labour can also say to the DUP: Vote with us in a VONC and we'll get a better deal that you'll be happy with, otherwise we'll abstain on May's deal as the lesser of two evils and you'll be stuck with it.
Evening all. My family's view on how to play Monopoly is a straightforward one: don't.
it does seem to go on a lot longer when I have played it recently than I remember it ever doing as a child.
It’s a board game for people who don’t like board games, and won’t help to change their minds.
Indeed. It's a poor game because the strategy is easy and one-dimensional (buy almost everything on which you land) and depends thereafter on luck, and it becomes obvious an hour or so in who is going to win, but you have to go through two hours' more pain before arriving at that conclusion. Although most people I know give up long before there is a single winner.
There are some brilliant board games on the market - mostly devised by Germans, it has to be said - where there are multiple ways to try and win, there is a good balance between skill and luck, and where the eventual winner isn't obvious until the final turn. Go DYOR.
May I suggest chess?
Not reliant enough on luck! I need a chance to win at least.
There's a good deal more luck in chess than many imagine, but generally the better player does win.
How so? Do you mean players unintentionally making good moves?
Does happen, but there are many other examples - e.g. choice of opening, blunders when winning, and in my case when I'm playing blitz on-line my opponent sometimes has the good fortune that my other half walks in and starts talking to me. Fatal.
How many politicians have vision etc.? One might argue that Blair did but I’m not sure that Adventures in Mesopotamia is what you want. Other than that, I consider that he avoided anything approaching a hard decision. Brown, no. Major, again no, Cameron, possibly but not interested in unpopular decisions. Arguably Nick Clegg (yes, really) and look where that got him.
I’m unconvinced that the electorate respects, or at least will vote for, parties led by the people you describe.
Would that be Nick "let's have an in/out EU referendum" Clegg vintage 2007? Or Nick "having a referendum is a terrible and demonic idea" Clegg, bottled in 2016?
The second one. An unpopular and correct decision.
How about a motion that "in view of the Government's proposed withdrawal agreement, this House has no confidence in the prime minister"? How about it, Jeremy Corbyn? Take the initiative.
If I recall correctly, there's a traditional Parliamentary technique for it - a motion to reduce the salary of the Minister by £1. Technically this has no effect (apart from the missing pound) but it's a symbol for "resign!".
Time for someone to make that move I think, there must be a good chance that some of the ERG would support a no confidence against May personally rather than the government as a whole.
May has reached the end of the road, she is blocking any moves forward by her pretence that the cadaver that is her deal is still alive and kicking. If she won't move on from that position, and she won't, then she must be pushed out of the way.
If there were a single grown up person who had a clue what they were doing and principles that I could buy into, I'd say bring it on.
So Dominic Grieve for PM?
Grieve? No. He's not a grown up he's an absolute fanatic who will take any action no matter the cost because he thinks it is a moral mission. He's the flip side of the ERG, he just has more brains and better judgement on when to strike. There has to be someone, leaver or remainer, who is more grown up.
Grieve? Better judgment? The guy who ended up voting against his own amendment? Leave it out.....
I didn't say perfect judgement, and he is a fanatic like the worst members of the ERG after all. But he has, individually and with fewer MPs on his side to call upon, caused problems with lasting consequences for the government, and his interventions seem to command generally greater respect and sense than many other amendments for example.
How many politicians have vision etc.? One might argue that Blair did but I’m not sure that Adventures in Mesopotamia is what you want. Other than that, I consider that he avoided anything approaching a hard decision. Brown, no. Major, again no, Cameron, possibly but not interested in unpopular decisions. Arguably Nick Clegg (yes, really) and look where that got him.
I’m unconvinced that the electorate respects, or at least will vote for, parties led by the people you describe.
Would that be Nick "let's have an in/out EU referendum" Clegg vintage 2007? Or Nick "having a referendum is a terrible and demonic idea" Clegg, bottled in 2016?
He did us a favour by vetoing one between 2010-2015. Pre-2010, like Cameron he thought it would be a good wheeze to see off the anti-EU nutters, but unlike Cameron he was subsequently very alive to the risks involved. Post-2015 he urged Cammo not to do it, but of course by then Cammo had no need to listen.
How about a motion that "in view of the Government's proposed withdrawal agreement, this House has no confidence in the prime minister"? How about it, Jeremy Corbyn? Take the initiative.
If I recall correctly, there's a traditional Parliamentary technique for it - a motion to reduce the salary of the Minister by £1. Technically this has no effect (apart from the missing pound) but it's a symbol for "resign!".
Time for someone to make that move I think, there must be a good chance that some of the ERG would support a no confidence against May personally rather than the government as a whole.
May has reached the end of the road, she is blocking any moves forward by her pretence that the cadaver that is her deal is still alive and kicking. If she won't move on from that position, and she won't, then she must be pushed out of the way.
There are reports TMay "threatened" the EU yesterday that if they didn't improve the backstop offer, she would take her Deal - which is also their deal - and crash it, deliberately: i.e. put it to parliament, next week, knowing it would be defeated.
Quite how that is a "threat" I dunno.
Anyhow I don't see how she can hold on until January 21. Once the last hangover has cleared on January 2nd No Deal will loom very large, and Something Will Snap.
I agree. May would look completely absurd if she went to the Commons and recommended it to crash the deal that she said "with all my heart " last week was the best way forward. Persons in grey suits, or perhaps white coats, would be summoned forthwith.
Reminds me of Tsipras's speech to the Greek Parliament after he caved to the EU, where he stood and said he didn't agree with the plans he was putting forward and he didn't think they would help, but they had no choice. And it worked!
The Greek parliament had two choices, the deal or Armageddon. We have three, the deal, Armageddon or revoking article 50. And when the chips are down I think Parliament will vote to revoke.
Revoke is the sensible way then make Brexit Boris the Brexit Secretary and give him until the 2022 election to come up with a plausible plan then a second referendum on GE day so it's not.mixed up with other issues. Boris plan vs remain.
You should be concerned how many people are warming to no deal... it’s becominf the default option for conservatives..
All of them advance it for negative reasons concerning the other options, and all of them are in denial as to the real life implications that will hit people who are a lot less secure than they are. Mr Morgan is unlikely to be affected one iota when it all goes wrong.
Can anyone explain to me why it would be a disgrace and the end of the Conservative Party if the government relied on some Labour votes to get around the impasse, but it's perfectly OK for the ERG to rely on Labour votes to block the EU's deal, against a Conservative government's policy?
Evening all. My family's view on how to play Monopoly is a straightforward one: don't.
it does seem to go on a lot longer when I have played it recently than I remember it ever doing as a child.
It’s a board game for people who don’t like board games, and won’t help to change their minds.
Indeed. It's a poor game because the strategy is easy and one-dimensional (buy almost everything on which you land) and depends thereafter on luck, and it becomes obvious an hour or so in who is going to win, but you have to go through two hours' more pain before arriving at that conclusion. Although most people I know give up long before there is a single winner.
There are some brilliant board games on the market - mostly devised by Germans, it has to be said - where there are multiple ways to try and win, there is a good balance between skill and luck, and where the eventual winner isn't obvious until the final turn. Go DYOR.
Ticket to Ride, Pit Crew, Flamme Rouge, Codenames. Easy family games.
True. And there are so many T2R variants on offer now, as well. Every one of my recent Xmas's has included several games. But for more dedicated gamers there is El Grande, 7Wonders, Terraforming Mars, Carcasonne and its many variants, Agricola and its sequels, Caverna, Puerto Rico, Navegador, Viticulture, Power Grid, the Dominion series of card games, Pandemic for an unusual team game, or even the enduring railway building games such as 1829 and its spinoffs. So many to choose from.
1829 is, unfortunately, dross (or to be more charitable a prototype). 1830 AH is outstanding (particularly with the Reading expansion). Perhaps Europa Universalis by Azure Wish Edition....
How many politicians have vision etc.? One might argue that Blair did but I’m not sure that Adventures in Mesopotamia is what you want. Other than that, I consider that he avoided anything approaching a hard decision. Brown, no. Major, again no, Cameron, possibly but not interested in unpopular decisions. Arguably Nick Clegg (yes, really) and look where that got him.
I’m unconvinced that the electorate respects, or at least will vote for, parties led by the people you describe.
I suppose it depends on the vision!
A vision does not have to be unpopular it could be more public spending leading to say a 24/7 NHS and public services that gave people a hand up rather than leaving them needing a perpetual hand out. On the other hand a vision could be less taxes and a reduction in state interference in peoples lives.
At the moment we have a PM who articulates Brexit means Brexit and offers little else! It is not a vision but a nightmare! Corbyn and his supporters say he is a man of ideology and principle but where is his vision? Nothing. It does not have to be ridiculous or even unpopular but the current leaders are failing. Just out of interest I don't agree Nick Clegg was a man of vision, he came unstuck because he promised No tuition fees and he and his party voted them through the commons. He could have said NO! Clegg could have had Cameron by the balls due to the LD being his life support in maintaining a parliamentary majority!
Yet another multi-millionaire urging the country to unite behind an outcome that will cause him absolutely no harm at all. It’s so wonderfully selfless, isn’t it?
Mr. T, inertia and stubbornness on her part, versus cowardice, ambition, division, and unwillingness on the other.
But, we'll see.
I think we will see something on the lines that I hoped for, on this site, a few days back. A Free Vote in the Commons for each of the four options:
1. No Deal 2. Revoke 3. Referendum 4. The Deal
Every MP will have to examine his or her conscience, and the views and prosperity of his or her constituents - and of the country - and vote accordingly. No hiding place, no abstaining, no running away. Then HMG will act on the views of the Commons.
In the FT they are saying that Liam Fox has come out in favour of this process, the so called "indicative vote". That seems significant.
And it is the only possible way out of the mess, at the moment, unless and until someone has a better idea.
But surely that 4 is at least 10 indicative outcomes:
1a. Hard No Deal 1b. Managed No Deal 2a. Revoke and not re-issue 2b. Revoke and re-issue 3a, b, c, d...... Referendum - God knows how many potential options this covers! 4a. The Deal - the EU don't blink at the threat of Hard No Deal 4b. The Deal - the EU blink and it gets changed
Evening all. My family's view on how to play Monopoly is a straightforward one: don't.
it does seem to go on a lot longer when I have played it recently than I remember it ever doing as a child.
It’s a board game for people who don’t like board games, and won’t help to change their minds.
Indeed. It's a poor game because the strategy is easy and one-dimensional (buy almost everything on which you land) and depends thereafter on luck, and it becomes obvious an hour or so in who is going to win, but you have to go through two hours' more pain before arriving at that conclusion. Although most people I know give up long before there is a single winner.
There are some brilliant board games on the market - mostly devised by Germans, it has to be said - where there are multiple ways to try and win, there is a good balance between skill and luck, and where the eventual winner isn't obvious until the final turn. Go DYOR.
Ticket to Ride, Pit Crew, Flamme Rouge, Codenames. Easy family games.
True. And there are so many T2R variants on offer now, as well. Every one of my recent Xmas's has included several games. But for more dedicated gamers there is El Grande, 7Wonders, Terraforming Mars, Carcasonne and its many variants, Agricola and its sequels, Caverna, Puerto Rico, Navegador, Viticulture, Power Grid, the Dominion series of card games, Pandemic for an unusual team game, or even the enduring railway building games such as 1829 and its spinoffs. So many to choose from.
I recently acquired a co-operative Thunderbirds board game - from the maker of Pandemic and with a lot of shared mechanics. That will help keep the family busy over Christmas, along with Dead of Winter, a quasi co-operative (both shared and individual objectives) zombie-fighting game. The latter I cunningly bought as a present for my sister, partly because she'll like, partly so I can play it again.
How many politicians have vision etc.? One might argue that Blair did but I’m not sure that Adventures in Mesopotamia is what you want. Other than that, I consider that he avoided anything approaching a hard decision. Brown, no. Major, again no, Cameron, possibly but not interested in unpopular decisions. Arguably Nick Clegg (yes, really) and look where that got him.
I’m unconvinced that the electorate respects, or at least will vote for, parties led by the people you describe.
Jo Grimond (and arguably Mrs T) were the last such. Grimond was single handedly responsible for taking the liberals from utter obscurity and recruiting to his standard a generation of activists that would lift the party up from the doldrums. Until Clegg decided to land on the snake that goes back to the first square on the board.
Can anyone explain to me why it would be a disgrace and the end of the Conservative Party if the government relied on some Labour votes to get around the impasse, but it's perfectly OK for the ERG to rely on Labour votes to block the EU's deal, against a Conservative government's policy?
Yes. Because reasons.
I suspect the real reason is if the deal passes the government falls, which is clearly a disaster the likes of which has never been seen, whereas with no deal maybe it doesn't fall right away.
How about a motion that "in view of the Government's proposed withdrawal agreement, this House has no confidence in the prime minister"? How about it, Jeremy Corbyn? Take the initiative.
If I recall correctly, there's a traditional Parliamentary technique for it - a motion to reduce the salary of the Minister by £1. Technically this has no effect (apart from the missing pound) but it's a symbol for "resign!".
Time for someone to make that move I think, there must be a good chance that some of the ERG would support a no confidence against May personally rather than the government as a whole.
May has reached the end of the road, she is blocking any moves forward by her pretence that the cadaver that is her deal is still alive and kicking. If she won't move on from that position, and she won't, then she must be pushed out of the way.
There are reports TMay "threatened" the EU yesterday that if they didn't improve the backstop offer, she would take her Deal - which is also their deal - and crash it, deliberately: i.e. put it to parliament, next week, knowing it would be defeated.
Quite how that is a "threat" I dunno.
Anyhow I don't see how she can hold on until January 21. Once the last hangover has cleared on January 2nd No Deal will loom very large, and Something Will Snap.
I agree. May would look completely absurd if she went to the Commons and recommended it to crash the deal that she said "with all my heart " last week was the best way forward. Persons in grey suits, or perhaps white coats, would be summoned forthwith.
Reminds me of Tsipras's speech to the Greek Parliament after he caved to the EU, where he stood and said he didn't agree with the plans he was putting forward and he didn't think they would help, but they had no choice. And it worked!
The Greek parliament had two choices, the deal or Armageddon. We have three, the deal, Armageddon or revoking article 50. And when the chips are down I think Parliament will vote to revoke.
Revoke is the sensible way then make Brexit Boris the Brexit Secretary and give him until the 2022 election to come up with a plausible plan then a second referendum on GE day so it's not.mixed up with other issues. Boris plan vs remain.
Revoke will be followed by a second referendum, and probably also a general election, the results of which will kill off the Brexit process.
How about a motion that "in view of the Government's proposed withdrawal agreement, this House has no confidence in the prime minister"? How about it, Jeremy Corbyn? Take the initiative.
If I recall correctly, there's a traditional Parliamentary technique for it - a motion to reduce the salary of the Minister by £1. Technically this has no effect (apart from the missing pound) but it's a symbol for "resign!".
Time for someone to make that move I think, there must be a good chance that some of the ERG would support a no confidence against May personally rather than the government as a whole.
May has reached the end of the road, she is blocking any moves forward by her pretence that the cadaver that is her deal is still alive and kicking. If she won't move on from that position, and she won't, then she must be pushed out of the way.
There are reports TMay "threatened" the EU yesterday that if they didn't improve the backstop offer, she would take her Deal - which is also their deal - and crash it, deliberately: i.e. put it to parliament, next week, knowing it would be defeated.
Quite how that is a "threat" I dunno.
Anyhow I don't see how she can hold on until January 21. Once the last hangover has cleared on January 2nd No Deal will loom very large, and Something Will Snap.
I agree. May would look completely absurd if she went to the Commons and recommended it to crash the deal that she said "with all my heart " last week was the best way forward. Persons in grey suits, or perhaps white coats, would be summoned forthwith.
Reminds me of Tsipras's speech to the Greek Parliament after he caved to the EU, where he stood and said he didn't agree with the plans he was putting forward and he didn't think they would help, but they had no choice. And it worked!
The Greek parliament had two choices, the deal or Armageddon. We have three, the deal, Armageddon or revoking article 50. And when the chips are down I think Parliament will vote to revoke.
The chips are not down though, full employment, record low unemployment, low inflation, low interest rates, wages rising faster than earnings, inequality (if you think such a thing is important) lowest for thirty years, economy stumbling along if a little slowly, deficit all but wiped out.
Look across to the continent and it appears to be a tinder box at the moment.
The 'build a cross party consensus for another referendum' option sounds too wholesome for this dark and troubled parliament. I can't see it. Neither can I see how a general election comes about. This leaves me looking at an appalling game of chicken as the clock runs down, Mrs May forcing Labour to choose between her Deal and No Deal, Labour if they hold their nerve and keep opposing forcing her to choose between No Deal and another referendum. The outcome then depends on who blinks. Who is the chicken. If it's Mrs May we get the referendum. If it's Labour we get the Deal. And if neither back down we get No Deal.
Labour will not back down on the deal, the potential costs to not even pretending they are trying to stop Brexit are too great. A referendum potentially offers May what she wants, so she would blink first, the question is how many more Cabinet Members would resign if she proposed it, depending on the question?
I think they would have quit already, I cannot see Fox resigning as he values being in power too much after the Adam Werritty debacle and exile from government! Likewise what is to be gained from resigning if the decision is in the hands of the people. MPs don't get off the greasy pole due to principle these days it is all about positioning IMO.
Can anyone explain to me why it would be a disgrace and the end of the Conservative Party if the government relied on some Labour votes to get around the impasse, but it's perfectly OK for the ERG to rely on Labour votes to block the EU's deal, against a Conservative government's policy?
Because it’s the famous “it’s only wrong when you do it”. When a Tory MP visits a food bank, it’s a disgrace, when a Labour MP/candidate goes to a food bank and gets themselves photographed, they are on the side of the angels. And no ulterior motive should be read into such behaviour.
Labour will not back down on the deal, the potential costs to not even pretending they are trying to stop Brexit are too great. A referendum potentially offers May what she wants, so she would blink first, the question is how many more Cabinet Members would resign if she proposed it, depending on the question?
But on the other hand offering a 2nd referendum (a.k.a. cancelling Brexit) would devastate the tory party and therefore neither she nor any other tory PM will do it.
Hence my view that the WA ultimately passes with Labour help (not necessarily whipped).
Let's hope that at least one of us is right because if I'm wrong about the Cons and you're wrong about Labour we are heading for the travesty of No Deal.
Mr. T, inertia and stubbornness on her part, versus cowardice, ambition, division, and unwillingness on the other.
But, we'll see.
I think we will see something on the lines that I hoped for, on this site, a few days back. A Free Vote in the Commons for each of the four options:
1. No Deal 2. Revoke 3. Referendum 4. The Deal
Every MP will have to examine his or her conscience, and the views and prosperity of his or her constituents - and of the country - and vote accordingly. No hiding place, no abstaining, no running away. Then HMG will act on the views of the Commons.
In the FT they are saying that Liam Fox has come out in favour of this process, the so called "indicative vote". That seems significant.
And it is the only possible way out of the mess, at the moment, unless and until someone has a better idea.
But surely that 4 is at least 10 indicative outcomes:
1a. Hard No Deal 1b. Managed No Deal 2a. Revoke and not re-issue 2b. Revoke and re-issue 3a, b, c, d...... Referendum - God knows how many potential options this covers! 4a. The Deal - the EU don't blink at the threat of Hard No Deal 4b. The Deal - the EU blink and it gets changed
"managed no deal" is marketing, not substance. Surely even you haven't fallen for that one?
Mr. T, inertia and stubbornness on her part, versus cowardice, ambition, division, and unwillingness on the other.
But, we'll see.
I think we will see something on the lines that I hoped for, on this site, a few days back. A Free Vote in the Commons for each of the four options:
1. No Deal 2. Revoke 3. Referendum 4. The Deal
Every MP will have to examine his or her conscience, and the views and prosperity of his or her constituents - and of the country - and vote accordingly. No hiding place, no abstaining, no running away. Then HMG will act on the views of the Commons.
In the FT they are saying that Liam Fox has come out in favour of this process, the so called "indicative vote". That seems significant.
And it is the only possible way out of the mess, at the moment, unless and until someone has a better idea.
But surely that 4 is at least 10 indicative outcomes:
1a. Hard No Deal 1b. Managed No Deal 2a. Revoke and not re-issue 2b. Revoke and re-issue 3a, b, c, d...... Referendum - God knows how many potential options this covers! 4a. The Deal - the EU don't blink at the threat of Hard No Deal 4b. The Deal - the EU blink and it gets changed
"managed no deal" is marketing, not substance. Surely even you haven't fallen for that one?
Really? A managed no deal would be a set of agreements to aid the flow of goods and people across trade areas for our mutual benefit, or even the wholesale ignoring of rules to allow things to carry on.
Yet another multi-millionaire urging the country to unite behind an outcome that will cause him absolutely no harm at all. It’s so wonderfully selfless, isn’t it?
I wonder what the national reaction would be if Piers Morgan were to choke on a fish bone?
Yet another multi-millionaire urging the country to unite behind an outcome that will cause him absolutely no harm at all. It’s so wonderfully selfless, isn’t it?
I wonder what the national reaction would be if Piers Morgan were to choke on a fish bone?
Mr. Scotland, bit weird, I'm reasonably sure the CAH chaps kept the idea free of copyright etc so others could make similar versions like Bards Dispense Profanity.
Mr. T, inertia and stubbornness on her part, versus cowardice, ambition, division, and unwillingness on the other.
But, we'll see.
I think we will see something on the lines that I hoped for, on this site, a few days back. A Free Vote in the Commons for each of the four options:
1. No Deal 2. Revoke 3. Referendum 4. The Deal
Every MP will have to examine his or her conscience, and the views and prosperity of his or her constituents - and of the country - and vote accordingly. No hiding place, no abstaining, no running away. Then HMG will act on the views of the Commons.
In the FT they are saying that Liam Fox has come out in favour of this process, the so called "indicative vote". That seems significant.
And it is the only possible way out of the mess, at the moment, unless and until someone has a better idea.
But surely that 4 is at least 10 indicative outcomes:
1a. Hard No Deal 1b. Managed No Deal 2a. Revoke and not re-issue 2b. Revoke and re-issue 3a, b, c, d...... Referendum - God knows how many potential options this covers! 4a. The Deal - the EU don't blink at the threat of Hard No Deal 4b. The Deal - the EU blink and it gets changed
"managed no deal" is marketing, not substance. Surely even you haven't fallen for that one?
Really? A managed no deal would be a set of agreements to aid the flow of goods and people across trade areas for our mutual benefit, or even the wholesale ignoring of rules to allow things to carry on.
You think otherwise?
It would depend on agreement over issues such as the role of the CJEU and ongoing UK payments to the EU. It’s a non-starter.
Mr. T, inertia and stubbornness on her part, versus cowardice, ambition, division, and unwillingness on the other.
But, we'll see.
I ea.
But one?
Really? A managed no deal would be a set of agreements to aid the flow of goods and people across trade areas for our mutual benefit, or even the wholesale ignoring of rules to allow things to carry on.
You think otherwise?
We'd be trying to do that in no deal, there is no difference. Where it suits both parties and the problem is big enough, for sure a sticking plaster can probably be agreed. Planes will keep flying. But having raised two fingers to the EU there won't be any such resolutions in areas that suit us but not them, and the whole of our import/export trade will suddenly be subject to red tape and delays that will have a devastating effect on many businesses large and small. Calling it "managed" is just a political trick to delude people that everything is under control.
Edit/ as Ivan Rogers says:
The “no deal + “ fantasy is that if we just had the guts to walk away, refuse to sign the Withdrawal Agreement with the backstop in it, and withhold a good half of the money the Prime Minister promised this time last year, capitals, suddenly realising we were serious, would come running for a series of mini deals which assured full trading continuity in all key sectors on basically unchanged Single Market and Customs Union terms.
I don’t know what tablets these people are taking, but I must confess I wish I were on them. It will be said of them as it was said of the Bourbons, I think: “they have learned nothing and they have forgotten nothing”.
The reality is that if the deal on the table falls apart because we have said “no”, there will not be some smooth rapid suite of mini side deals – from aviation to fisheries, from road haulage to data, from derivatives to customs and veterinary checks, from medicines to financial services, as the EU affably sits down with this Prime Minister or another one.
The 27 will legislate and institute unilaterally temporary arrangements which assure continuity where they need it, and cause us asymmetric difficulties where they can. And a UK Government, which knows the efficacy of most of its contingency planning depends, to a greater or lesser degree on others’ actions out of its control, will then have to react – no doubt with a mixture of inevitable compliance and bellicose retaliation.
I wouldn't have thought that Piers Morgan has a very good track record on politics. I usually notice his politic input when he is making excuses for Trump, his old social friend. Many people judge a person by the people they choose to associate themselves with!
Maybe if Morgan persists in interfering in politics he will appear on the side of a bus with his friend Trump! Anything Trump is associated with is Toxic and Piers may have escaped with a career from the US once but where will he go if he is tainted in the UK?
Yet another multi-millionaire urging the country to unite behind an outcome that will cause him absolutely no harm at all. It’s so wonderfully selfless, isn’t it?
I wonder what the national reaction would be if Piers Morgan were to choke on a fish bone?
raise our glasses and toast the little gentleman in the silvery waistcoat?
Mr. T, inertia and stubbornness on her part, versus cowardice, ambition, division, and unwillingness on the other.
But, we'll see.
I think we will see something on the lines that I hoped for, on this site, a few days back. A Free Vote in the Commons for each of the four options:
1. No Deal 2. Revoke 3. Referendum 4. The Deal
Every MP will have to examine his or her conscience, and the views and prosperity of his or her constituents - and of the country - and vote accordingly. No hiding place, no abstaining, no running away. Then HMG will act on the views of the Commons.
In the FT they are saying that Liam Fox has come out in favour of this process, the so called "indicative vote". That seems significant.
And it is the only possible way out of the mess, at the moment, unless and until someone has a better idea.
But surely that 4 is at least 10 indicative outcomes:
1a. Hard No Deal 1b. Managed No Deal 2a. Revoke and not re-issue 2b. Revoke and re-issue 3a, b, c, d...... Referendum - God knows how many potential options this covers! 4a. The Deal - the EU don't blink at the threat of Hard No Deal 4b. The Deal - the EU blink and it gets changed
"managed no deal" is marketing, not substance. Surely even you haven't fallen for that one?
Really? A managed no deal would be a set of agreements to aid the flow of goods and people across trade areas for our mutual benefit, or even the wholesale ignoring of rules to allow things to carry on.
You think otherwise?
We'd be trying to do that in no deal
There's a difference between trying to do it before March 29th and afterwards.
Evening all. My family's view on how to play Monopoly is a straightforward one: don't.
it does seem to go on a lot longer when I have played it recently than I remember it ever doing as a child.
It’s a board game for people who don’t like board games, and won’t help to change their minds.
Indeed. It's a poor game because the strategy is easy and one-dimensional (buy almost everything on which you land) and depends thereafter on luck, and it becomes obvious an hour or so in who is going to win, but you have to go through two hours' more pain before arriving at that conclusion. Although most people I know give up long before there is a single winner.
There are some brilliant board games on the market - mostly devised by Germans, it has to be said - where there are multiple ways to try and win, there is a good balance between skill and luck, and where the eventual winner isn't obvious until the final turn. Go DYOR.
Ticket to Ride, Pit Crew, Flamme Rouge, Codenames. Easy family games.
True. And there are so many T2R variants on offer now, as well. Every one of my recent Xmas's has included several games. But for more dedicated gamers there is El Grande, 7Wonders, Terraforming Mars, Carcasonne and its many variants, Agricola and its sequels, Caverna, Puerto Rico, Navegador, Viticulture, Power Grid, the Dominion series of card games, Pandemic for an unusual team game, or even the enduring railway building games such as 1829 and its spinoffs. So many to choose from.
1829 is, unfortunately, dross (or to be more charitable a prototype). 1830 AH is outstanding (particularly with the Reading expansion). Perhaps Europa Universalis by Azure Wish Edition....
Isn't that a computer game?
Boeadgame first, at the monumental scope level. The English rules were of varying coherence which one could put down to poor translation. Unfortunately in the original French they were little better.
How about a motion that "in view of the Government's proposed withdrawal agreement, this House has no confidence in the prime minister"? How about it, Jeremy Corbyn? Take the initiative.
If I recall correctly, there's a traditional Parliamentary technique for it - a motion to reduce the salary of the Minister by £1. Technically this has no effect (apart from the missing pound) but it's a symbol for "resign!".
Time for someone to make that move I think, there must be a good chance that some of the ERG would support a no confidence against May personally rather than the government as a whole.
May has reached the end of the road, she is blocking any moves forward by her pretence that the cadaver that is her deal is still alive and kicking. If she won't move on from that position, and she won't, then she must be pushed out of the way.
There are reports TMay "threatened" the EU yesterday that if they didn't improve the backstop offer, she would take her Deal - which is also their deal - and crash it, deliberately: i.e. put it to parliament, next week, knowing it would be defeated.
Quite how that is a "threat" I dunno.
Anyhow I don't see how she can hold on until January 21. Once the last hangover has cleared on January 2nd No Deal will loom very large, and Something Will Snap.
I agree. May would look completely absurd if she went to the Commons and recommended it to crash the deal that she said "with all my heart " last week was the best way forward. Persons in grey suits, or perhaps white coats, would be summoned forthwith.
Reminds me of Tsipras's speech to the Greek Parliament after he caved to the EU, where he stood and said he didn't agree with the plans he was putting forward and he didn't think they would help, but they had no choice. And it worked!
The Greek parliament had two choices, the deal or Armageddon. We have three, the deal, Armageddon or revoking article 50. And when the chips are down I think Parliament will vote to revoke.
The chips are not down though, full employment, record low unemployment, low inflation, low interest rates, wages rising faster than earnings, inequality (if you think such a thing is important) lowest for thirty years, economy stumbling along if a little slowly, deficit all but wiped out.
And all these things achieved under the EU jackboot...
Anyway, all of this Brexit guff is irrelevant when compared to the real crisis that has crept up unawares - the Great Teabag Crisis of 2018. There was only one teabag left in the caddy!!! And I am now drinking the tea it made
And the supermarkets close in 8 7 mins!
Unless you are lucky enough to live in Scotland where they don't have such idiotic rules.
The Great Teabag Crisis of 2018 has been resolved thanks to the local garage whose shop is 24/7
Take it as a dry run for April 2019.
Alternative Brexits are available in the local Shell Garage? Retail is getting more versatile all the time
The few good Tories who could satisfyingly lead the country are not yet in Cabinet or even in Westminster.
Do you mean me !!!!!!
Actually, from the little I know of you from your posts, I would indeed prefer you as PM to any of the aforementioned.
(And I didn’t even mention Truss, Fox or Williamson).
You are kind and I would support TM deal for the business stability it would bring but failing that we need a means to remain, either by revoking A50 or a referendum, but that does have lots of dangers
See an 8th person has died in France today from the demonstrations and water cannons are being used on demonstrations at the EU building in Brussels.
We live in very uncertain times and sadly we do not have the politicians needed to grow up and come together for all our sakes
The few good Tories who could satisfyingly lead the country are not yet in Cabinet or even in Westminster.
Do you mean me !!!!!!
Actually, from the little I know of you from your posts, I would indeed prefer you as PM to any of the aforementioned.
(And I didn’t even mention Truss, Fox or Williamson).
You are kind and I would support TM deal for the business stability it would bring but failing that we need a means to remain, either by revoking A50 or a referendum, but that does have lots of dangers
See an 8th person has died in France today from the demonstrations and water cannons are being used on demonstrations at the EU building in Brussels.
We live in very uncertain times and sadly we do not have the politicians needed to grow up and come together for all our sakes
boris's water cannons got sold for scrap just when the market was about to pick up.
Comments
Cads Produce Calamity could be its name.
So Dominic Grieve for PM, anyone?
Which is quite a turnaround from someone who voted for this shitshow and has mostly been irrationally pro-Brexit thereafter.
I read an interesting article in one of the papers claiming David Lidington was her likely successor as he was her deputy in all but name, while he may have great qualities I don't think we need another void as PM!
Remainers can play as the camp guards, shooting on sight the escaping Tommies.
How many politicians have vision etc.? One might argue that Blair did but I’m not sure that Adventures in Mesopotamia is what you want. Other than that, I consider that he avoided anything approaching a hard decision. Brown, no. Major, again no, Cameron, possibly but not interested in unpopular decisions. Arguably Nick Clegg (yes, really) and look where that got him.
I’m unconvinced that the electorate respects, or at least will vote for, parties led by the people you describe.
I mean, until now I wasn’t sure about Piers Morgan.
https://twitter.com/piersmorgan/status/1074281731941896192?s=21
https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/1074306394575249409
A vision does not have to be unpopular it could be more public spending leading to say a 24/7 NHS and public services that gave people a hand up rather than leaving them needing a perpetual hand out. On the other hand a vision could be less taxes and a reduction in state interference in peoples lives.
At the moment we have a PM who articulates Brexit means Brexit and offers little else! It is not a vision but a nightmare! Corbyn and his supporters say he is a man of ideology and principle but where is his vision? Nothing. It does not have to be ridiculous or even unpopular but the current leaders are failing. Just out of interest I don't agree Nick Clegg was a man of vision, he came unstuck because he promised No tuition fees and he and his party voted them through the commons. He could have said NO! Clegg could have had Cameron by the balls due to the LD being his life support in maintaining a parliamentary majority!
1a. Hard No Deal
1b. Managed No Deal
2a. Revoke and not re-issue
2b. Revoke and re-issue
3a, b, c, d...... Referendum - God knows how many potential options this covers!
4a. The Deal - the EU don't blink at the threat of Hard No Deal
4b. The Deal - the EU blink and it gets changed
I suspect the real reason is if the deal passes the government falls, which is clearly a disaster the likes of which has never been seen, whereas with no deal maybe it doesn't fall right away.
Look across to the continent and it appears to be a tinder box at the moment.
Because it’s the famous “it’s only wrong when you do it”. When a Tory MP visits a food bank, it’s a disgrace, when a Labour MP/candidate goes to a food bank and gets themselves photographed, they are on the side of the angels. And no ulterior motive should be read into such behaviour.
Hence my view that the WA ultimately passes with Labour help (not necessarily whipped).
Let's hope that at least one of us is right because if I'm wrong about the Cons and you're wrong about Labour we are heading for the travesty of No Deal.
Indeed, with Corbyn still firmly ensconced, it’s difficult to see what would.
it would be very hard for the Tommies when the french, dutch and poles are all helping the kommandant.
Cards Against Humanity.
You think otherwise?
I suggested we create a version based on politicians, called Cads Produce Calamity.
Javid? Lightweight.
Hunt? Weasel.
Gove? Ideologue.
Johnson? Clown.
Rees-Mogg? Throwback.
Hammond? Boring.
Gauke, Lidington, Hind? Invisible.
Rudd? Another lightweight.
Leadsom, Mordaunt? More lightweights.
Raab? Klutz.
Etc
The few good Tories who could satisfyingly lead the country are not yet in Cabinet or even in Westminster.
Edit/ as Ivan Rogers says:
The “no deal + “ fantasy is that if we just had the guts to walk away, refuse to sign the Withdrawal Agreement with the backstop in it, and withhold a good half of the money the Prime Minister promised this time last year, capitals, suddenly realising we were serious, would come running for a series of mini deals which assured full trading continuity in all key sectors on basically unchanged Single Market and Customs Union terms.
I don’t know what tablets these people are taking, but I must confess I wish I were on them. It will be said of them as it was said of the Bourbons, I think: “they have learned nothing and they have forgotten nothing”.
The reality is that if the deal on the table falls apart because we have said “no”, there will not be some smooth rapid suite of mini side deals – from aviation to fisheries, from road haulage to data, from derivatives to customs and veterinary checks, from medicines to financial services, as the EU affably sits down with this Prime Minister or another one.
The 27 will legislate and institute unilaterally temporary arrangements which assure continuity where they need it, and cause us asymmetric difficulties where they can. And a UK Government, which knows the efficacy of most of its contingency planning depends, to a greater or lesser degree on others’ actions out of its control, will then have to react – no doubt with a mixture of inevitable compliance and bellicose retaliation.
Maybe if Morgan persists in interfering in politics he will appear on the side of a bus with his friend Trump! Anything Trump is associated with is Toxic and Piers may have escaped with a career from the US once but where will he go if he is tainted in the UK?
If it weren't for Corbyn, May would be the worst party leader in my adult life time.
Anyway, I must be off. Play nicely, everyone.
(And I didn’t even mention Truss, Fox or Williamson).
See an 8th person has died in France today from the demonstrations and water cannons are being used on demonstrations at the EU building in Brussels.
We live in very uncertain times and sadly we do not have the politicians needed to grow up and come together for all our sakes
That, and the fact that he sees experts who dare to disagree with him as 'the enemy'.