Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » After Thursday’s Alastair Meeks 2019 predictions David Herdson
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » After Thursday’s Alastair Meeks 2019 predictions David Herdson takes a very different view of what the New Year will bring
2018 was boring, wasn’t it? No leadership change among the three main parties for the first time in four years, only the third year this decade without a general election or a major referendum, and not even the distraction of a big foreign election (the best on offer was the Italian election, which also produced the only change among the G7 leaders).
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Once again we have the idea that it is ALL about Westminster
Time for a cuppa
On topic, I fear Brexit is going to happen, although it will be on May's Deal, very much for the reasons Mr H gives. By the summer though problems will be developing, particularly around holiday travel and they will be loudly construed in part of the Press as Europes Revenge, which will sour the situation even more.
I'm sure Cable will go, probably shortly after Brexit; it hasn't helped the LD's being behind the SNP in Parliamentary seats, but neither Cable nor the back office has covered itself with glory and a new leader...... not sure it will be Swinson, ....... will have to follow Jo Grimonds advice and 'march toward the sound of gunfire'! The LD's will continue to do well in local government elections though and just might do very well in May.
Both the other two leaders will carry on, although under threat.
TBH, I don't think there will be a GE; the function of the Conservative party is to 'keep our side in power', and somehow that is what they'll do, although a Private Members Bill to bring Norn Ireland into line with both rUK and the RoI on abortion might just pass and send the DUP into space.
Personally I'm hoping that I shall have an operation this year which will sort out my lumbar stenosis and in due course give me both legs again. I also hope that this time next year I shall be in a warmer climate.
First, it doesn't matter for these purposes whether it *should* happen. Politically-minded people are very flexible about process (in a "we were always at war with Eastasia" kind of way), and very good at justifying the justice and legitimacy of a process that leads to the outcome they want, so if there was no good argument for or against a referendum, someone would come up with one as necessary. I personally think there are good arguments for one (go figure) but it doesn't matter whether I'm right.
The argument why a referendum may happen is to do with the parliamentary veto points. There are lots of MPs, especially on the opposition side, who want a new referendum. It's likely that at least some of their votes will be needed for TMay's deal to pass. It looks like it will be difficult to get a Commons majority for TMay's deal. I know the argument is that if TMay holds firm the Remainist MPs will blink, but it's not really clear that they will; Neither Leave nor Remain voters will thank them for it, and the negative political consequences of No Deal mainly apply to the government, not the opposition. But it looks likely that they would vote for the deal in return for the referendum. So there's your parliamentary majority. It doesn't sound like there are MPs wanting No Deal on the ballot paper, so that deals with that problem, and I don't think it's true that it's hard to legislate for one while the ratification process is ongoing; You pass all the legislation you would have otherwise, but state that it's subject to a binding referendum. The main difference is that you have more time (because you can get an extension) and you have enough votes, both of which make the ratification legislation easier to pass, not harder.
The argument against is simply that the PM may not want to do it. Her base would hate her if she did, and I think David Herdson's point #4 is correct, so there's pretty much no way around her. OTOH her career is about to end *unless* she does something like this to upset the board, so it wouldn't be at all weird for her to agree to it; She may even be hoping for it in a "don't throw me in the briar patch" way: Either her referendum wins, in which case she's triumphant and vindicated, or remain wins, which is the result she prefers.
Unfortunately betting on this ends up being a bet on Theresa May's mental state, which is hard to read as she doesn't tweet much or write poetry or anything.
Saying "Brexit means Brexit" was enough to begin with. Then the citizens of nowhere speech. If it appears that remain would keep her in the job a pivot is not unlikely...
I suppose if David is right about that rule being flexible, then I guess it comes down to how many of the 200 who supported her did so on the basis that they think she will deliver Remain, and how many would tolerate No Deal.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-46700743
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molly_Bang
(2) The actor Macaulay Culkin has announced that he doesn't like his existing middle name (Carson), so he's going to change his middle name by deed poll (or whatever the American equivalent is) to "Macaulay Culkin", which means that his name will be Macaulay Macaulay Culkin Culkin.
www.nzherald.co.nz/entertainment/news/article.cfm?c_id=1501119&objectid=12183022
(3) The thought thus occurred to me that if Molly Bang had the same idea, she would become Molly Molly Bang Bang.
At least i am in better form now, having had some buttered crumpets drizzled with honey to round off breakfast
If reality starts to bite and Brexit hits people in their wallets, we could see some bigger changes. Until them people will carry on arguing the toss and trading opinions.
Whatever replaced it would be criticised in exactly the same way.
When I was visiting my parents over Christmas my mum, when Paddy Ashdown's death was in the news, asked me who is the present Lib Dem leader. She follows current affairs but she genuinely didn't know... says it all, alas.
They need to wind the party up and start afresh.
I cannot see Labour MPs - or for that matter Tory MPs opposed to it - turning round and voting for May's deal. What is clear is that a majority of MPs will block no deal and with the Grieve amendment handing control to the Commons once May's deal falls you will see that happen fairly quickly. The government will then be faced with scenarios where it choses to ignore the expressed will of the majority of MPs and once again finds itself in contempt which surely doesn't leave it functional - they may not like being told what to do by the Commons but no government can serve as such without the support of MPs.
This also helps May. She will not get her deal through parliament. Her deal is Brexit as defined by the referendum question. Her deal is the only form of Brexit on the table. So going over the heads of MPs will be her only remaining move. Whether a general election or fresh referendum is anyone's guess, but determined as she is to deliver her deal a fresh mandate is the only way to do so
I feel your pain...
I must be one of the few people who are pretty relaxed about 2019. Brexit either will or won't happen, it won't be as dramatic as advertised, either which way, and most people will simply get on with their lives and move on.
Brave to make predictions about 2019, whichever way one's jumping.
A month or so ago I was reasonably confident of a second referendum occurring, now I think it's an outside chance. But we'll see.
The last line remains profoundly true though.
(Hope all is well with you and your wife atm. Have you got the paintbrushes out yet?)
There are other reasons why it won't go ahead, including the very real risk of crashing out without a deal if we have one, but that's the key reason it's off the table. The only reason anyone argues otherwise is that there's not a snowflake's chance in hell of revoking Article 50 without it, and the desperate wishful thinking and fantasising about it by a number of politicians who can't believe people don't trust them is all that keeps the idea alive.
And before anyone mentions Greece (1) we have procedures to follow, they didn't (2) we are a much larger, more complex country (3) the referendum there was essentially posturing for public relations so it didn't matter that it was about as reliable as a ConHome poll and (4) in case anyone hasn't noticed it backfired very spectacularly when having rejected a deal offered by the EU as unacceptably bad, they were forced to accept a much worse one.
From helping out in the 2018 local elections I can see that there's a huge potential Lib Dem vote out there... in the two wards in my city that we actively contested (the only two we could afford to contest actively) we raised the party vote from lost deposit scores to 24% and 19% mostly at Labour's expense - and this is not a city where we have much history. Dotted around the country there are sparse little pockets of Lib Dem surges where local parties, with next to no resources and very few active, but enthusiastic, members, have got their acts together and are working hard. However... these little advances are entirely down to the local membership and local campaigns... there's no national campaign to speak of.
There seems to be around three blocs in Parliament.
200 for May’s Deal
150 for No Deal
300 for Remain (via referendum*)
These are approximate numbers, I think John Rentoul is keeping count somewhere on Twitter.
Occam’s razor on presumed second prefs suggests that May wins if she can get No Deal taken off the table. But Remain wins if May’s Deal can be taken off the table. So does this come down to sequencing of votes in the HoC?
*Yes I know referendum does not automatically mean Remain. But it is the only acceptable path toward Remain.
There's an article here on some of the runners and riders:
https://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20180905/world/whos-eu-a-look-at-the-front-runners-to-replace-jean-claude-juncker.688434
Of course, what the Spitzenkandidat nonsense didn't allow for is what happens if there is a sudden surge in eurosceptic parties at the next election. Not likely, not impossible either. And that really would have profound implications for a free trade deal with the UK.
Admittedly, it's hard to imagine anyone they put forward could be worse than the drink sodden tax fiddling pseudo-totalitarian failed wannabe dictator we've had for the last few years - but then people wondered whether Trump could be as bad as he was painted (note to Corbyn backers - he ended up being worse than expected).
If the deal is not ratified, the only valid option is "no deal". Parliament can't stop this without the co-operation of the government, because legislation would be required.
Only a matter of time before we return to 'betrayal of the greatest democratic expression in British history, there WILL be blood' I guess.
https://twitter.com/vizcomic/status/1078799885858672641
David comes from the viewpoint of someone who feels party loyalty strongly. I don't feel it at all, never having belonged to a party. In a year when party loyalty is unusually weak and when the challenges that the country faces cut across party lines, are passionately felt and cannot be ducked, will party loyalty win through (in which case David will be correct) or will there be a breakdown? The answer is far from obvious.
I generally agree. A second referendum is ruled out because of the inherent contradictions. The result won't matter, just having one will poison the political well for years to come. And what will be the questions?
A suggested three-way option ... Leave with no-deal, Leave with the May deal, and Remain, could well end with a 20/35/45 split. A win for Remain with a minority share. Yet, to use the same question exposes the 'peoples' vote bollocks. We wanted a re-run because we didn't like the first result.
If Mrs May steps down, there'll be huge pressure for a new GE.
Why mot a female beauty pageant instead? It will be a superficial analysis anyway.
A lot ahead of us to keep us entertained anyway
Happy New Year.
However, the practical problem is how to get stuff through the twin veto points of parliament and the PM, and I don't think either of those are keen to ask the voters if they want No Deal.
https://twitter.com/DrNostromo/status/1078730320067944448
To have then gone on to (1) devolved politics, (2) international politics, and (3) the economy, home and abroad, could easily have taken 5000 words. I have, over time, been prepared to write longer pieces, having increased from an initial advised length of around 500 words, but I do think it'd pushing it to have upped that tenfold.
In any case, each of those three other areas could reasonably form a thread in their own right. To mix them all up just muddles discussion and/or leaves areas unexplored.
Labour loyalists do put up with a lot, probably more than the Tories who are more fractious. But Labour has nearly half of its members in London nowadays and is more in danger of a complete split. Not immediately, but a few years hence and it will be a gradual process.
The LDs will recover, but their MO was of being conciliatory, not extreme, a position they have on Brexit. Once that is done and dusted (as far as it can be), they can diverge from the Greens and be 'Homo Domesticus' again.
They could have simplified it considerably by exempting spouses of UK citizens automatically.
In that scenario the question would be simple - should the UK enact the May deal and leave the EU or should the UK reject the May deal and remain in the EU? A leave vote enacts May's deal, a remain vote revokes Article 50. The sweetener to the EU in granting an extension to A50 could be that the government would enact the result immediately.
As for no deal, it's dead. A majority of MPs will reject it which means choosing one of the alternatives - May's deal or revoke. They will not let the UK crash out.
I think David Herdson is spot on with his 1,2 and 3.
The newspaper headlines today are claiming that a hard Brexit would be only bad and not really bad. Is this the limits of the country's ambition for 2019? It is s**t but it could be worse.
https://twitter.com/PeterAdamSmith/status/1078655056302481410
Some will continue to think they know best. Good luck selling that to them, in an election maybe just weeks away. But some - my guess is enough - will think they tried their damndest, but stopping Brexit was just out of reach. So go with May's deal, whch is the least unpalatable Brexit they will need to consider. Especially when set against No Deal Brexit - which they will not want to own.
But let's be clear. No Deal Brexit is only still a viable thing because of the actions of those 300, still trying to stop the tide coming in. They should take some comfort from Cnut's actions - his point was to demonstrate that the tide was going to come in, regardless of his actions.
My own feeling is that if Corbyn resigned the dynamic would change overnight. We might even find the parliamentary u-bend mysteriously clears. We would certainly be spared the absurd sight of Jacob Rees Mogg and Arlene Phillips claiming to speak for the majority. By losing the extreme left we'd also lose the much more terrifying extreme right which for the last six months has been running this circus.
You'd have a better argument with peerages since those actually include power. Since gongs don't I don't really understand why people get so upset. I wouldn't be surprised if we keep them even after the monarchy is abolished - systems can be improved, but as we have one for recognising service there's no need to tear it down for a new one.
Imagine TMay loses the meaningful vote with (say) 80 Con rebels. SNP/LD/Lab-remain offer to pass the deal subject to a Deal vs Remain referendum. Also imagine (bear with me) TMay then agrees and puts this to a (whipped) vote.
In the resulting Deal+Referendum vote, how many Con rebels are there?
But the one think I'd like more detail on is what happens when th a Government declares no deal it's central planning assumption. Unless it's a bluff, I reckon that Gauke, Clark, Hammond, Rudd, etc quit the cabinet at that point, and the likes of Soubry, Wollaston, Boles quit the party. The markets go haywire, a company of the stature of Airbus announce that with regret they are implementing their contingency plan to leave the U.K. - how can the government survive all of that?
That would be one of the most significant moments of the whole process and I'm not sure the Government could survive that moment - but it's implied that it's not a big deal above. In the hard Brexiteer mindset anyway, but it could be riots on the streets stuff. How do you see that point being handled David?
Practically speaking there are three options. Pass May's deal and leave the EU. Don't pass May's deal and leave the EU. Don't leave the EU. At the moment none of these are acceptable to parliament. May hoped to run down the clock and say "my deal or no deal" but the ECJ have scuppered that - "my deal or don't leave" is what most MPs have in mind. Forget the "democratic outrage" angle against revoke, whatever happens now will enrage millions of voters - including millions of leave voters who incorr3ctky consider May's deal to not be leaving.
Which is why another vote is needed. Personally I wouldn't go for a referendum despite me campaigning for one - it's a tactical ploy to bring focus back to the democratic deficit for all three options. Both parties need to put up or shut up. A general election and be very clear what you stand for. That such a general election would split both parties is an added bonus.
There is most agreement on 8: "There will be no major realignment of the parties". 96% chance this is correct (or at least that it doesn't lead to a new party having most seats).
The most marginal prediction is 2: "The government will get its Brexit deal approved" Less than 56% chance. (Depends on chance of no deal crash out).
This is because prediction 1: "Britain will leave on or shortly after March 29 is a 56% chance. (44% that it will be by 29 March. 12 % that it will be in Q2). We will only leave on that timescale if either the Brexit deal is passed or we crash out with no deal.
7: At least one party leader will go in 2019 looks is greater than a 65% chance based on May alone.
May 65% chance, Cable 37%+ chance (first to go), Corbyn 31% chance.
And the second to last thing they would want to see is Theresa May returned until 2024 with a working majority. Worse only than a slim majority Corbyn government jettisoning NI from the UK and into the arms of the Republic (after all, NI's sitting MPs are only de facto Tories, so what's not to love?).
I can see the DUP waiting to see who May's successor would be, and what deal they can extract to enable that new PM to stay in office a while. Must be worth a few billion? Maybe delivering that bridge to Scotland, eh Boris? But their price for this lease of life is that the PM goes - and goes soon.