The treaty does 3 things. (1) Settles the bill. (2) Protects citizens' rights. (3) Guarantees an open border in Ireland.
Number 3 is problematic for leavers, yes, I see that. Because it steers the FTA to one of close alignment absent a high tech solution to the border.
But for remainers? What on earth is the problem with any of it? Do they not want to settle our liabilities? Do they not want to protect citizens' rights? Do they not want a close future relationship which ensures an open border in Ireland? It's a yes to all three, surely.
So what is going on here?
When pressed, the principal objection of remainers appears to be that we are 'giving up our voice' in EU decision making. Que? Of course we are! We're leaving. The clear and absurd inference is that they will only support a deal that retains our rights of membership. In other words, for them, brexit means remain.
C'mon. It's a nonsense.
The calculated risk is not a risk I am willing to take. If we have to be subject to EU rules, we should have a vote in shaping them OR at very least a cast iron way of unilaterally opting out.
The treaty does 3 things. (1) Settles the bill. (2) Protects citizens' rights. (3) Guarantees an open border in Ireland.
Number 3 is problematic for leavers, yes, I see that. Because it steers the FTA to one of close alignment absent a high tech solution to the border.
But for remainers? What on earth is the problem with any of it? Do they not want to settle our liabilities? Do they not want to protect citizens' rights? Do they not want a close future relationship which ensures an open border in Ireland? It's a yes to all three, surely.
So what is going on here?
When pressed, the principal objection of remainers appears to be that we are 'giving up our voice' in EU decision making. Que? Of course we are! We're leaving. The clear and absurd inference is that they will only support a deal that retains our rights of membership. In other words, for them, brexit means remain.
C'mon. It's a nonsense.
Put simply: if leavers aren't prepared to support it, why should we?
You know when an EU nation does something silly and needs a package from the EU to bail it out. The EU comes up with some strict terms, costs and a technocratic leader is appointed to force the medicine through the national parliament as the only way
It’s ironic that is where Brexit has taken us and even more ironic that half the Leavers are cheering it along.
After 2300 on 29/3/18, it will not be the EU's business and the gauleiters Minister-President Herr Juncker and Reichskanzlerin Frau Merkel can be ignored.
The fantasies of a Little Englander. No wonder the world is laughing at us.
Indeed - daodao appears to have overdosed on Dad's Army repeats. Deeply embarassing.
I used "flowery" descriptions to make the point that the EU's leaders are naturally acting in their (rather than the UK's) interest and that the EU is now clearly a vehicle for Germany to promote its own interests behind a mask.
It's not "flowery", it's simply offensive. A gauleiter is a Nazi leader; you are calling Juncker a Nazi.
Plus it reinforces the impression that some Brits continually hark back to the war. No wonder this country struggles when a proportion of the population insist on living in the past. Get over it!
"For example, what would the DUP like best? My guess is that they would be very happy to have another general election to see the clock tick down on a no-deal Brexit and will vote accordingly"
But that General Election is also likely to unravel the unique arithmetic that gives the DUP their leverage. What they would like best is for a new Tory leader who will be alligned better with their own views on Brexit, whilst continuing to send pork by the shipload to NI. So no deal Brexit, May stepping down and a Leaver taking over will be just fine and dandy with the DUP.
I think that this is a very important point that is regularly given far less attention than it should be. When was the last time anyone cared what those troublesome MPs from NI thought? 1979?
Who can seriously doubt that the backstop would have been swept through with a plethora of platitudes and assurances for the greater good if May had got her 50+ majority. Given it is nearly 40 years since this last happened what are the odds on such an eventuality happening again after a GE?
The DUP have by happenstance found themselves with real power at exactly the time that they need it to protect their position in the Union. Whether they are doing that successfully or sensibly is not the issue: the point is that they are players. They would be crazy to give that up. Therefore they will not vote for a VonC unless it is certain to stop Mays deal coming into force. And even then...
That’s not the right question. The question is what the DUP want power for. My assessment is that they don’t want anything that would put Northern Ireland’s status in the UK in question and they want Brexit. If they can achieve both at once so much the better. A general election at the right time, eating up time on the clock, would be just peachy and well worth a few less influential years.
And who’s to say the next election will produce a conclusive result anyway? The polls currently suggest otherwise.
"For example, what would the DUP like best? My guess is that they would be very happy to have another general election to see the clock tick down on a no-deal Brexit and will vote accordingly"
But that General Election is also likely to unravel the unique arithmetic that gives the DUP their leverage. What they would like best is for a new Tory leader who will be alligned better with their own views on Brexit, whilst continuing to send pork by the shipload to NI. So no deal Brexit, May stepping down and a Leaver taking over will be just fine and dandy with the DUP.
I think that's right. Also, does anyone poll NI seats for party preference? - I can't see any. But the current position of complete DUP dominance (especially given SF being AWOL) might not last forever either. Does anyone with knowledge of the province know whether any of the DUP seats might be under threat?
The treaty does 3 things. (1) Settles the bill. (2) Protects citizens' rights. (3) Guarantees an open border in Ireland.
Number 3 is problematic for leavers, yes, I see that. Because it steers the FTA to one of close alignment absent a high tech solution to the border.
But for remainers? What on earth is the problem with any of it? Do they not want to settle our liabilities? Do they not want to protect citizens' rights? Do they not want a close future relationship which ensures an open border in Ireland? It's a yes to all three, surely.
So what is going on here?
When pressed, the principal objection of remainers appears to be that we are 'giving up our voice' in EU decision making. Que? Of course we are! We're leaving. The clear and absurd inference is that they will only support a deal that retains our rights of membership. In other words, for them, brexit means remain.
C'mon. It's a nonsense.
It hands complete control to Brussels including effective administration over part of the UK. That i the DUP's objection. The Deal destroys democracy in NI. Shock news - even Remainers believe in democracy and wanting the best for the UK. The Deal does not provide this.
The Deal does improve slightly if you are prepared to throw NI under the bus
The treaty does 3 things. (1) Settles the bill. (2) Protects citizens' rights. (3) Guarantees an open border in Ireland.
Number 3 is problematic for leavers, yes, I see that. Because it steers the FTA to one of close alignment absent a high tech solution to the border.
But for remainers? What on earth is the problem with any of it? Do they not want to settle our liabilities? Do they not want to protect citizens' rights? Do they not want a close future relationship which ensures an open border in Ireland? It's a yes to all three, surely.
So what is going on here?
When pressed, the principal objection of remainers appears to be that we are 'giving up our voice' in EU decision making. Que? Of course we are! We're leaving. The clear and absurd inference is that they will only support a deal that retains our rights of membership. In other words, for them, brexit means remain.
C'mon. It's a nonsense.
Er... maybe Remainers don't support it because it means we Leave?
Most of the time most MPs will do the thing that is most likely to give them most chance of remaining an MP. From here, for Tory MPs that means voting to ensure that the UK leaves the EU on 29th March 2019 and for Labour MPs it is making sure to do what Jeremy tells them to do. Thus, a government led by Theresa May will take us out of the EU on 29th March 2019. The only issue is whether it will be under her deal or No Deal. May would prefer the former, Corbyn the latter. It could be that Jeremy is the one who gets his way.
For a Labour MP in a leave constituency I suspect they need to ensure that we leave with as little pain as possible. In a no deal exit every piece of pain will be pinned on their shoulders
I do not get the remainer opposition to the deal..
I am not opposing the deal: quite the opposite, in fact. I would prefer "Remain" but that is not on the table and I try not to select fictions. Based on all information presently available the decision is correct.
The calculated risk is not a risk I am willing to take. If we have to be subject to EU rules, we should have a vote in shaping them OR at very least a cast iron way of unilaterally opting out.
We only get a vote in shaping them if we remain. Many things can be construed as Brexit but not that.
A cast iron way of unilaterally opting out of the backstop? That's undeliverable. Since there would then not be a backstop.
You know when an EU nation does something silly and needs a package from the EU to bail it out. The EU comes up with some strict terms, costs and a technocratic leader is appointed to force the medicine through the national parliament as the only way
It’s ironic that is where Brexit has taken us and even more ironic that half the Leavers are cheering it along.
After 2300 on 29/3/18, it will not be the EU's business and the gauleiters Minister-President Herr Juncker and Reichskanzlerin Frau Merkel can be ignored.
The fantasies of a Little Englander. No wonder the world is laughing at us.
Indeed - daodao appears to have overdosed on Dad's Army repeats. Deeply embarassing.
I used "flowery" descriptions to make the point that the EU's leaders are naturally acting in their (rather than the UK's) interest and that the EU is now clearly a vehicle for Germany to promote its own interests behind a mask.
Out of interest, when exactly did the EU become a vehicle for Germany to promote its own interests behind a mask?
The treaty does 3 things. (1) Settles the bill. (2) Protects citizens' rights. (3) Guarantees an open border in Ireland.
Number 3 is problematic for leavers, yes, I see that. Because it steers the FTA to one of close alignment absent a high tech solution to the border.
But for remainers? What on earth is the problem with any of it? Do they not want to settle our liabilities? Do they not want to protect citizens' rights? Do they not want a close future relationship which ensures an open border in Ireland? It's a yes to all three, surely.
So what is going on here?
When pressed, the principal objection of remainers appears to be that we are 'giving up our voice' in EU decision making. Que? Of course we are! We're leaving. The clear and absurd inference is that they will only support a deal that retains our rights of membership. In other words, for them, brexit means remain.
C'mon. It's a nonsense.
Well put. The reality is that the majority of remainers in Parliament who claimed to respect the decision in 2016 and were elected on manifestos that committed themselves to doing so are hypocrites and liars who search around for any excuse to go back on their promises. So they refight the 2016 campaign endlessly, they complain about trivial amounts of spending when remain spent more, they hint darkly at Russian and other foreign interference, they thrive on the incompetence of this government and its inability to negotiate effectively and they have created a scenario where we need not 1 but 3 Acts of Parliament to leave plus a MV of course.
If they had been candid about their continued devotion to the EU and sought re-election on that basis, as in fairness the SNP and the Lib Dems did ( both of whom had poor election results), you could have some respect for them. The view that being in the EU is a good thing is a perfectly reasonable position. But they preferred to lie. They are contemptible.
The treaty does 3 things. (1) Settles the bill. (2) Protects citizens' rights. (3) Guarantees an open border in Ireland.
Number 3 is problematic for leavers, yes, I see that. Because it steers the FTA to one of close alignment absent a high tech solution to the border.
But for remainers? What on earth is the problem with any of it? Do they not want to settle our liabilities? Do they not want to protect citizens' rights? Do they not want a close future relationship which ensures an open border in Ireland? It's a yes to all three, surely.
So what is going on here?
When pressed, the principal objection of remainers appears to be that we are 'giving up our voice' in EU decision making. Que? Of course we are! We're leaving. The clear and absurd inference is that they will only support a deal that retains our rights of membership. In other words, for them, brexit means remain.
C'mon. It's a nonsense.
There’s a whole thread header in the question of Theresa May’s unpersuasiveness. I’ve written enough recently, however.
In brief, she came to power alienating Remainers and giving Leavers unrealistic expectations of what she could negotiate. So now both groups see the deal as a betrayal in different ways.
I'd never heard the pennies on a railway line before. Has anyone tried it? I've sometimes wondered what would come out the other end if Jacob Rees Mogg fell under a steam roller
I did when I was a young teenager and as the 'Flying Scotsman' thundered towards it in full steam a real panic spread over me but to my utter relief it had disappeared to somewhere, I know not where, and I never did it again
Maybe it was my ' running through the fields of wheat' moment
You know when an EU nation does something silly and needs a package from the EU to bail it out. The EU comes up with some strict terms, costs and a technocratic leader is appointed to force the medicine through the national parliament as the only way
It’s ironic that is where Brexit has taken us and even more ironic that half the Leavers are cheering it along.
After 2300 on 29/3/18, it will not be the EU's business and the gauleiters Minister-President Herr Juncker and Reichskanzlerin Frau Merkel can be ignored.
The fantasies of a Little Englander. No wonder the world is laughing at us.
Indeed - daodao appears to have overdosed on Dad's Army repeats. Deeply embarassing.
I used "flowery" descriptions to make the point that the EU's leaders are naturally acting in their (rather than the UK's) interest and that the EU is now clearly a vehicle for Germany to promote its own interests behind a mask.
It's not "flowery", it's simply offensive. A gauleiter is a Nazi leader; you are calling Juncker a Nazi.
Plus it reinforces the impression that some Brits continually hark back to the war. No wonder this country struggles when a proportion of the population insist on living in the past. Get over it!
I only used the term "gauleiter" in the sense of "an overbearing German official".
"For example, what would the DUP like best? My guess is that they would be very happy to have another general election to see the clock tick down on a no-deal Brexit and will vote accordingly"
But that General Election is also likely to unravel the unique arithmetic that gives the DUP their leverage. What they would like best is for a new Tory leader who will be alligned better with their own views on Brexit, whilst continuing to send pork by the shipload to NI. So no deal Brexit, May stepping down and a Leaver taking over will be just fine and dandy with the DUP.
I think that this is a very important point that is regularly given far less attention than it should be. When was the last time anyone cared what those troublesome MPs from NI thought? 1979?
Who can seriously doubt that the backstop would have been swept through with a plethora of platitudes and assurances for the greater good if May had got her 50+ majority. Given it is nearly 40 years since this last happened what are the odds on such an eventuality happening again after a GE?
The DUP have by happenstance found themselves with real power at exactly the time that they need it to protect their position in the Union. Whether they are doing that successfully or sensibly is not the issue: the point is that they are players. They would be crazy to give that up. Therefore they will not vote for a VonC unless it is certain to stop Mays deal coming into force. And even then...
That’s not the right question. The question is what the DUP want power for. My assessment is that they don’t want anything that would put Northern Ireland’s status in the UK in question and they want Brexit. If they can achieve both at once so much the better. A general election at the right time, eating up time on the clock, would be just peachy and well worth a few less influential years.
And who’s to say the next election will produce a conclusive result anyway? The polls currently suggest otherwise.
Chaos suits some people.
The very strong probability is that the next Parliament will not give a damn about what the DUP think about anything. And it’s not even just the backstop. The next Parliament may well impose gay marriage and abortion on NI along with more sincere efforts to integrate education. They have a lot to lose.
FPT @Charles forgive me, I did not mean to be rude. My answer would be very lengthy and I didn’t think anyone would be much interested.
In brief, I would start from identifying the system’s capabilities. The Home Office is famously poor at processing immigration applications and adding another 3 million would seem unwise in the extreme unless absolutely necessary.
On that basis I would have told EU residents that none needed to make a positive application now but that they should keep a documentary record of their pre-referendum residency in the UK, listing appropriate documents that the government would accept in future should the matter become important, and that they could apply now if they so wished.
Would there be some abuse? Of course. Would it matter? Not really. Britain is not going to be deporting EU citizens except in very unusual circumstances.
The calculated risk is not a risk I am willing to take. If we have to be subject to EU rules, we should have a vote in shaping them OR at very least a cast iron way of unilaterally opting out.
We only get a vote in shaping them if we remain. Many things can be construed as Brexit but not that.
A cast iron way of unilaterally opting out of the backstop? That's undeliverable. Since there would then not be a backstop.
My preferred backstop is re-entry. We leave, we try to cut a deal, if we fail we go back in. This is better than the backstop. All the same terms, but a vote on policy and if necessary a unilateral route out. It satisfies 2016 without committing us potentially forever to something silly.
"For example, what would the DUP like best? My guess is that they would be very happy to have another general election to see the clock tick down on a no-deal Brexit and will vote accordingly"
But that General Election is also likely to unravel the unique arithmetic that gives the DUP their leverage. What they would like best is for a new Tory leader who will be alligned better with their own views on Brexit, whilst continuing to send pork by the shipload to NI. So no deal Brexit, May stepping down and a Leaver taking over will be just fine and dandy with the DUP.
I think that this is a very important point that is regularly given far less attention than it should be. When was the last time anyone cared what those troublesome MPs from NI thought? 1979?
Who can seriously doubt that the backstop would have been swept through with a plethora of platitudes and assurances for the greater good if May had got her 50+ majority. Given it is nearly 40 years since this last happened what are the odds on such an eventuality happening again after a GE?
The DUP have by happenstance found themselves with real power at exactly the time that they need it to protect their position in the Union. Whether they are doing that successfully or sensibly is not the issue: the point is that they are players. They would be crazy to give that up. Therefore they will not vote for a VonC unless it is certain to stop Mays deal coming into force. And even then...
That’s not the right question. The question is what the DUP want power for. My assessment is that they don’t want anything that would put Northern Ireland’s status in the UK in question and they want Brexit. If they can achieve both at once so much the better. A general election at the right time, eating up time on the clock, would be just peachy and well worth a few less influential years.
And who’s to say the next election will produce a conclusive result anyway? The polls currently suggest otherwise.
Chaos suits some people.
The very strong probability is that the next Parliament will not give a damn about what the DUP think about anything. And it’s not even just the backstop. The next Parliament may well impose gay marriage and abortion on NI along with more sincere efforts to integrate education. They have a lot to lose.
The DUP faces that risk every election. But it has the non-repeatable chance of a glittering prize right now. It will reach for it.
The treaty does 3 things. (1) Settles the bill. (2) Protects citizens' rights. (3) Guarantees an open border in Ireland.
Number 3 is problematic for leavers, yes, I see that. Because it steers the FTA to one of close alignment absent a high tech solution to the border.
But for remainers? What on earth is the problem with any of it? Do they not want to settle our liabilities? Do they not want to protect citizens' rights? Do they not want a close future relationship which ensures an open border in Ireland? It's a yes to all three, surely.
So what is going on here?
When pressed, the principal objection of remainers appears to be that we are 'giving up our voice' in EU decision making. Que? Of course we are! We're leaving. The clear and absurd inference is that they will only support a deal that retains our rights of membership. In other words, for them, brexit means remain.
C'mon. It's a nonsense.
Well put. The reality is that the majority of remainers in Parliament who claimed to respect the decision in 2016 and were elected on manifestos that committed themselves to doing so are hypocrites and liars who search around for any excuse to go back on their promises. So they refight the 2016 campaign endlessly, they complain about trivial amounts of spending when remain spent more, they hint darkly at Russian and other foreign interference, they thrive on the incompetence of this government and its inability to negotiate effectively and they have created a scenario where we need not 1 but 3 Acts of Parliament to leave plus a MV of course.
If they had been candid about their continued devotion to the EU and sought re-election on that basis, as in fairness the SNP and the Lib Dems did ( both of whom had poor election results), you could have some respect for them. The view that being in the EU is a good thing is a perfectly reasonable position. But they preferred to lie. They are contemptible.
The government has done absolutely nothing to reconcile Remain supporters to the referendum decision. It is the author of its own misfortune.
The treaty does 3 things. (1) Settles the bill. (2) Protects citizens' rights. (3) Guarantees an open border in Ireland.
Number 3 is problematic for leavers, yes, I see that. Because it steers the FTA to one of close alignment absent a high tech solution to the border.
But for remainers? What on earth is the problem with any of it? Do they not want to settle our liabilities? Do they not want to protect citizens' rights? Do they not want a close future relationship which ensures an open border in Ireland? It's a yes to all three, surely.
So what is going on here?
When pressed, the principal objection of remainers appears to be that we are 'giving up our voice' in EU decision making. Que? Of course we are! We're leaving. The clear and absurd inference is that they will only support a deal that retains our rights of membership. In other words, for them, brexit means remain.
C'mon. It's a nonsense.
Well put. The reality is that the majority of remainers in Parliament who claimed to respect the decision in 2016 and were elected on manifestos that committed themselves to doing so are hypocrites and liars who search around for any excuse to go back on their promises. So they refight the 2016 campaign endlessly, they complain about trivial amounts of spending when remain spent more, they hint darkly at Russian and other foreign interference, they thrive on the incompetence of this government and its inability to negotiate effectively and they have created a scenario where we need not 1 but 3 Acts of Parliament to leave plus a MV of course.
If they had been candid about their continued devotion to the EU and sought re-election on that basis, as in fairness the SNP and the Lib Dems did ( both of whom had poor election results), you could have some respect for them. The view that being in the EU is a good thing is a perfectly reasonable position. But they preferred to lie. They are contemptible.
kinabalu's simple question is well put, and your answer is to the point. To me the Remainers are playing Br'er Rabbit and May's deal is the briar patch.
The treaty does 3 things. (1) Settles the bill. (2) Protects citizens' rights. (3) Guarantees an open border in Ireland.
Number 3 is problematic for leavers, yes, I see that. Because it steers the FTA to one of close alignment absent a high tech solution to the border.
But for remainers? What on earth is the problem with any of it? Do they not want to settle our liabilities? Do they not want to protect citizens' rights? Do they not want a close future relationship which ensures an open border in Ireland? It's a yes to all three, surely.
So what is going on here?
When pressed, the principal objection of remainers appears to be that we are 'giving up our voice' in EU decision making. Que? Of course we are! We're leaving. The clear and absurd inference is that they will only support a deal that retains our rights of membership. In other words, for them, brexit means remain.
C'mon. It's a nonsense.
Well put. The reality is that the majority of remainers in Parliament who claimed to respect the decision in 2016 and were elected on manifestos that committed themselves to doing so are hypocrites and liars who search around for any excuse to go back on their promises. So they refight the 2016 campaign endlessly, they complain about trivial amounts of spending when remain spent more, they hint darkly at Russian and other foreign interference, they thrive on the incompetence of this government and its inability to negotiate effectively and they have created a scenario where we need not 1 but 3 Acts of Parliament to leave plus a MV of course.
If they had been candid about their continued devotion to the EU and sought re-election on that basis, as in fairness the SNP and the Lib Dems did ( both of whom had poor election results), you could have some respect for them. The view that being in the EU is a good thing is a perfectly reasonable position. But they preferred to lie. They are contemptible.
The government has done absolutely nothing to reconcile Remain supporters to the referendum decision. It is the author of its own misfortune.
May has. Her deal is the least worst outcome possible for remainers. As @Kinabulu says, other than the fact of leaving what more could they ask for?
The treaty does 3 things. (1) Settles the bill. (2) Protects citizens' rights. (3) Guarantees an open border in Ireland.
Number 3 is problematic for leavers, yes, I see that. Because it steers the FTA to one of close alignment absent a high tech solution to the border.
But for remainers? What on earth is the problem with any of it? Do they not want to settle our liabilities? Do they not want to protect citizens' rights? Do they not want a close future relationship which ensures an open border in Ireland? It's a yes to all three, surely.
So what is going on here?
When pressed, the principal objection of remainers appears to be that we are 'giving up our voice' in EU decision making. Que? Of course we are! We're leaving. The clear and absurd inference is that they will only support a deal that retains our rights of membership. In other words, for them, brexit means remain.
C'mon. It's a nonsense.
Well put. The reality is that the majority of remainers in Parliament who claimed to respect the decision in 2016 and were elected on manifestos that committed themselves to doing so are hypocrites and liars who search around for any excuse to go back on their promises. So they refight the 2016 campaign endlessly, they complain about trivial amounts of spending when remain spent more, they hint darkly at Russian and other foreign interference, they thrive on the incompetence of this government and its inability to negotiate effectively and they have created a scenario where we need not 1 but 3 Acts of Parliament to leave plus a MV of course.
If they had been candid about their continued devotion to the EU and sought re-election on that basis, as in fairness the SNP and the Lib Dems did ( both of whom had poor election results), you could have some respect for them. The view that being in the EU is a good thing is a perfectly reasonable position. But they preferred to lie. They are contemptible.
kinabalu's simple question is well put, and your answer is to the point. To me the Remainers are playing Br'er Rabbit and May's deal is the briar patch.
While Leavers oppose the deal, Remainers are under no pressure to prop it up. Why should Leavers have the monopoly on crying betrayal?
The treaty does 3 things. (1) Settles the bill. (2) Protects citizens' rights. (3) Guarantees an open border in Ireland.
Number 3 is problematic for leavers, yes, I see that. Because it steers the FTA to one of close alignment absent a high tech solution to the border.
But for remainers? What on earth is the problem with any of it? Do they not want to settle our liabilities? Do they not want to protect citizens' rights? Do they not want a close future relationship which ensures an open border in Ireland? It's a yes to all three, surely.
So what is going on here?
When pressed, the principal objection of remainers appears to be that we are 'giving up our voice' in EU decision making. Que? Of course we are! We're leaving. The clear and absurd inference is that they will only support a deal that retains our rights of membership. In other words, for them, brexit means remain.
C'mon. It's a nonsense.
Well put. The reality is that the majority of remainers in Parliament who claimed to respect the decision in 2016 and were elected on manifestos that committed themselves to doing so are hypocrites and liars who search around for any excuse to go back on their promises. So they refight the 2016 campaign endlessly, they complain about trivial amounts of spending when remain spent more, they hint darkly at Russian and other foreign interference, they thrive on the incompetence of this government and its inability to negotiate effectively and they have created a scenario where we need not 1 but 3 Acts of Parliament to leave plus a MV of course.
If they had been candid about their continued devotion to the EU and sought re-election on that basis, as in fairness the SNP and the Lib Dems did ( both of whom had poor election results), you could have some respect for them. The view that being in the EU is a good thing is a perfectly reasonable position. But they preferred to lie. They are contemptible.
The government has done absolutely nothing to reconcile Remain supporters to the referendum decision. It is the author of its own misfortune.
May has. Her deal is the least worst outcome possible for remainers. As @Kinabulu says, other than the fact of leaving what more could they ask for?
The deal was imposed by the EU. The government hasn’t offered a sausage to Remainers.
The treaty does 3 things. (1) Settles the bill. (2) Protects citizens' rights. (3) Guarantees an open border in Ireland.
Number 3 is problematic for leavers, yes, I see that. Because it steers the FTA to one of close alignment absent a high tech solution to the border.
But for remainers? What on earth is the problem with any of it? Do they not want to settle our liabilities? Do they not want to protect citizens' rights? Do they not want a close future relationship which ensures an open border in Ireland? It's a yes to all three, surely.
So what is going on here?
When pressed, the principal objection of remainers appears to be that we are 'giving up our voice' in EU decision making. Que? Of course we are! We're leaving. The clear and absurd inference is that they will only support a deal that retains our rights of membership. In other words, for them, brexit means remain.
C'mon. It's a nonsense.
Well put. The reality is that the majority of remainers in Parliament who claimed to respect the decision in 2016 and were elected on manifestos that committed themselves to doing so are hypocrites and liars who search around for any excuse to go back on their promises. So they refight the 2016 campaign endlessly, they complain about trivial amounts of spending when remain spent more, they hint darkly at Russian and other foreign interference, they thrive on the incompetence of this government and its inability to negotiate effectively and they have created a scenario where we need not 1 but 3 Acts of Parliament to leave plus a MV of course.
If they had been candid about their continued devotion to the EU and sought re-election on that basis, as in fairness the SNP and the Lib Dems did ( both of whom had poor election results), you could have some respect for them. The view that being in the EU is a good thing is a perfectly reasonable position. But they preferred to lie. They are contemptible.
The government has done absolutely nothing to reconcile Remain supporters to the referendum decision. It is the author of its own misfortune.
Just to add, as the EU has made abundantly clear, this is the only deal possible that respects TMay's 'red lines'. Those red lines were wholly determined by leaver concerns, without any reference to - or attempt to reconcile - remainers. And now the leavers, many of whom played an active part in negotiating it, have decided they don't like it. It's a bit rich to expect remainers to ride to the rescue.
Classy MM. I’m just disappointed that you’ve fallen for it. You’ve clearly made your bed. Hopefully all will be well. But she’s taken us down a dangerous path, it could have been avoided, it’s yours to own either way now.
I wish we were elsewhere. But if it is an ill-advised poorly-prepared No Deal or May's Shit Deal, I have to go with May's Shit Deal. But all involved with getting us to this point should be removed from any power and influence forthwith.
The alternative is an ill-conceived wish-list of Not Brexit. At least I'm confonting reality and making unpalatable choices. We had a vote to Leave. We need to honour that. The risk to democracy of not doing so is large and troubling.
Again, the people shouting loudest about the risks of No Deal Brexit are those Remainers who could prevent it.
May has offered nothing to Remainers, nothing. There is no reason for them to back the deal. Not even a fig leaf.
If you want people to put their name to the deal this really matters. Fear if something worse is not enough. Especially when the something else was avoidable.
Point is, the something that was once avoidable is (and has always been) the default position. May is exploiting that for her own ends. But she is also exploiting the very fears that those who decry it as an outcome express.
Meanwhile, much fannying about is not providing an alternative that enough will coalesce around. The Remainer ship circles the Hard Brexit whirlpool, getting ever closer to doom. And yet still that Remainer ship refuses to change course. "Steady as she goes...."
FPT @Charles forgive me, I did not mean to be rude. My answer would be very lengthy and I didn’t think anyone would be much interested.
In brief, I would start from identifying the system’s capabilities. The Home Office is famously poor at processing immigration applications and adding another 3 million would seem unwise in the extreme unless absolutely necessary.
On that basis I would have told EU residents that none needed to make a positive application now but that they should keep a documentary record of their pre-referendum residency in the UK, listing appropriate documents that the government would accept in future should the matter become important, and that they could apply now if they so wished.
Would there be some abuse? Of course. Would it matter? Not really. Britain is not going to be deporting EU citizens except in very unusual circumstances.
That strikes me as common sense. The Home Office is completely incapable of managing our current immigration. The system is in chaos and could not possibly cope with another 3-4m “clients”.
If the government lose a VONC I am not so sure the DUP would prefer a general election to propping up a Corbyn government instead. In the case of the latter they are still Kingmaker and can dictate terms, in the case of either a Tory or Corbyn majority government or a Corbyn and SNP government after a general election however the DUP and their agenda can be dismissed as irrelevant.
The DUP are also likely to have seen the Northern Ireland polls showing No Deal makes a united Ireland more likely, in some respects therefore a Corbyn style permanent Customs Union plus single market elements on workers' rights for the whole UK is better than the backstop for Northern Ireland alone for the DUP and also poses less of a threat to the Union. Notice too even John McDonnell joking about getting out his orange sash.
Do not rule out therefore PM Corbyn by the middle of next year, propped up by the SNP, the LDs, the DUP, Plaid and the Greens and BINO Brexit in a similar scenario to Spain now where the Socialists are in power without having won a general election and despite having significantly fewer MPs than the main conservatives due to manoueverings of minority parties in parliament
Classy MM. I’m just disappointed that you’ve fallen for it. You’ve clearly made your bed. Hopefully all will be well. But she’s taken us down a dangerous path, it could have been avoided, it’s yours to own either way now.
I wish we were elsewhere. But if it is an ill-advised poorly-prepared No Deal or May's Shit Deal, I have to go with May's Shit Deal. But all involved with getting us to this point should be removed from any power and influence forthwith.
The alternative is an ill-conceived wish-list of Not Brexit. At least I'm confonting reality and making unpalatable choices. We had a vote to Leave. We need to honour that. The risk to democracy of not doing so is large and troubling.
Again, the people shouting loudest about the risks of No Deal Brexit are those Remainers who could prevent it.
May has offered nothing to Remainers, nothing. There is no reason for them to back the deal. Not even a fig leaf.
If you want people to put their name to the deal this really matters. Fear if something worse is not enough. Especially when the something else was avoidable.
Point is, the something that was once avoidable is (and has always been) the default position. May is exploiting that for her own ends. But she is also exploiting the very fears that those who decry it as an outcome express.
Meanwhile, much fannying about is not providing an alternative that enough will coalesce around. The Remainer ship circles the Hard Brexit whirlpool, getting ever closer to doom. And yet still that Remainer ship refuses to change course. "Steady as she goes...."
If May wants to throw a tantrum and crash the ship if people don’t do as they are told, that is entirely on her.
My preferred backstop is re-entry. We leave, we try to cut a deal, if we fail we go back in. This is better than the backstop. All the same terms, but a vote on policy and if necessary a unilateral route out. It satisfies 2016 without committing us potentially forever to something silly.
But no deal = no transition, so does that not entail a prolonged period of WTO, economic turbulence, job losses, Irish border issues?
The treaty does 3 things. (1) Settles the bill. (2) Protects citizens' rights. (3) Guarantees an open border in Ireland.
Number 3 is problematic for leavers, yes, I see that. Because it steers the FTA to one of close alignment absent a high tech solution to the border.
But for remainers? What on earth is the problem with any of it? Do they not want to settle our liabilities? Do they not want to protect citizens' rights? Do they not want a close future relationship which ensures an open border in Ireland? It's a yes to all three, surely.
So what is going on here?
When pressed, the principal objection of remainers appears to be that we are 'giving up our voice' in EU decision making. Que? Of course we are! We're leaving. The clear and absurd inference is that they will only support a deal that retains our rights of membership. In other words, for them, brexit means remain.
C'mon. It's a nonsense.
Well put. The reality is that the majority of remainers in Parliament who claimed to respect the decision in 2016 and were elected on manifestos that committed themselves to doing so are hypocrites and liars who search around for any excuse to go back on their promises. So they refight the 2016 campaign endlessly, they complain about trivial amounts of spending when remain spent more, they hint darkly at Russian and other foreign interference, they thrive on the incompetence of this government and its inability to negotiate effectively and they have created a scenario where we need not 1 but 3 Acts of Parliament to leave plus a MV of course.
If they had been candid about their continued devotion to the EU and sought re-election on that basis, as in fairness the SNP and the Lib Dems did ( both of whom had poor election results), you could have some respect for them. The view that being in the EU is a good thing is a perfectly reasonable position. But they preferred to lie. They are contemptible.
The government has done absolutely nothing to reconcile Remain supporters to the referendum decision. It is the author of its own misfortune.
May has. Her deal is the least worst outcome possible for remainers. As @Kinabulu says, other than the fact of leaving what more could they ask for?
The deal was imposed by the EU. The government hasn’t offered a sausage to Remainers.
They are offering this deal. May has been willing to lose quite a number of cabinet ministers and to face down a vote of no confidence in her party to do so. She should be supported by rational people on both sides of the argument. Have you not said that if you were in Parliament you would vote for it?
You know when an EU nation does something silly and needs a package from the EU to bail it out. The EU comes up with some strict terms, costs and a technocratic leader is appointed to force the medicine through the national parliament as the only way
It’s ironic that is where Brexit has taken us and even more ironic that half the Leavers are cheering it along.
After 2300 on 29/3/18, it will not be the EU's business and the gauleiters Minister-President Herr Juncker and Reichskanzlerin Frau Merkel can be ignored.
The fantasies of a Little Englander. No wonder the world is laughing at us.
Indeed - daodao appears to have overdosed on Dad's Army repeats. Deeply embarassing.
I used "flowery" descriptions to make the point that the EU's leaders are naturally acting in their (rather than the UK's) interest and that the EU is now clearly a vehicle for Germany to promote its own interests behind a mask.
Out of interest, when exactly did the EU become a vehicle for Germany to promote its own interests behind a mask?
It has become more evident since about 2005, when Merkel became Chancellor and integration of East Germany was essentially complete. I was worried about this possibility at the time of German re-unification, but it didn't manifest itself for a while.
However, Germany is now clearly the dominant power within the EU and the Euro is run in its interest. European history has been dominated since the 1860s by conflicts between Germany and its neighbours, but Germany has now realised that the best way to achieve and maintain its dominance is by a soft approach rather than ruthless aggression, via a multinational front organisation. The EU has been more successful than its German predecessors in its Eastern policies, although reaching its tentacles into the further (non-Ukrainian) parts of the Ukraine seems to be a bridge too far.
I was suspicious of the EU following it's behaviour towards Greece in 2010-1 (and recall a caricature of Merkel in Nazi uniform published then in the Daily Mail). However, I only became hostile to the EU following the violent coup that it fomented in Kiev in February 2014 overthrowing a democratically elected government that wouldn't toe the EU's line. I recall reading articles shortly afterwards by Peter Hitchens, Nigel Farage and Jeremy Corbyn (then a lowly back-bench MP) about this event that convinced me that the EU was a problem from which it would be better if the UK was detached.
Well put. The reality is that the majority of remainers in Parliament who claimed to respect the decision in 2016 and were elected on manifestos that committed themselves to doing so are hypocrites and liars who search around for any excuse to go back on their promises. So they refight the 2016 campaign endlessly, they complain about trivial amounts of spending when remain spent more, they hint darkly at Russian and other foreign interference, they thrive on the incompetence of this government and its inability to negotiate effectively and they have created a scenario where we need not 1 but 3 Acts of Parliament to leave plus a MV of course.
If they had been candid about their continued devotion to the EU and sought re-election on that basis, as in fairness the SNP and the Lib Dems did ( both of whom had poor election results), you could have some respect for them. The view that being in the EU is a good thing is a perfectly reasonable position. But they preferred to lie. They are contemptible.
The government has done absolutely nothing to reconcile Remain supporters to the referendum decision. It is the author of its own misfortune.
May has. Her deal is the least worst outcome possible for remainers. As @Kinabulu says, other than the fact of leaving what more could they ask for?
The deal was imposed by the EU. The government hasn’t offered a sausage to Remainers.
They are offering this deal. May has been willing to lose quite a number of cabinet ministers and to face down a vote of no confidence in her party to do so. She should be supported by rational people on both sides of the argument. Have you not said that if you were in Parliament you would vote for it?
I would vote for this deal. It’s abject but it delivers the Brexit that was campaigned for.
However, I can well understand how Remain supporters unreconciled to the vote might feel no obligation to support a deal which they regard as worse than the current terms and which, crucially, does not have the support of a majority of Leavers. Why should they compromise on something that no one actually wants?
I still think May's Deal is likely to get passed in the next month but if not I can see Tory remainers supporting a VoNC in preference to No Deal.
If a VoNC leads to a parliament being dissolved on say 27 February with a GE on 4th April (and assuming the WA MV and legislation has not been passed) is there anything that could happen at that point to prevent a No Deal exit?
Presumably TMay stays as PM until the election. But could she:
1. Agree her Deal with the EU? No - because she hasn't got the MV passed.
2. Revoke A50? Almost certainly not but... The ECJ ruling states the revocation request must be “in accordance with its constitutional requirements and following a democratic process”, but it leaves it for Britain (and presumably British courts) to decide what that process is. I have seen arguments that since the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Act 2017 allowed, rather than prescribed, that "The Prime Minister may notify, under Article 50(2) of the Treaty on European Union, the United Kingdom's intention to withdraw from the EU." it also allows her not to do that.
3. Extend the A50 period? This requires all EU27 members to agree so may be tricky but on balance I think they would agree to it if a GE was underway.
Option 3. seems most likely to me if May remains PM in the run up to the GE (as she surely would), in preference to lapsing into No Deal during a GE campaign.
Most of the time most MPs will do the thing that is most likely to give them most chance of remaining an MP. From here, for Tory MPs that means voting to ensure that the UK leaves the EU on 29th March 2019 and for Labour MPs it is making sure to do what Jeremy tells them to do. Thus, a government led by Theresa May will take us out of the EU on 29th March 2019. The only issue is whether it will be under her deal or No Deal. May would prefer the former, Corbyn the latter. It could be that Jeremy is the one who gets his way.
Good for JC, particularly if he can in future plausibly claim not to have been involved, so his hands would be "clean".
No Deal is a fantasy that does seem to appeal mostly to the kind of wealthy, privileged people who will suffer few of its consequences.
No Deal appeals most to wealthy, privileged, home owning, retired people for whom a recession, rising unemployment and the threat of negative equity and home repossessions is less of a risk. Even a lot of City Workers will lose their jobs under No Deal, at least if they want to stay working in the UK
Well put. The reality is that the majority of remainers in Parliament who claimed to respect the decision in 2016 and were elected on manifestos that committed themselves to doing so are hypocrites and liars who search around for any excuse to go back on their promises. So they refight the 2016 campaign endlessly, they complain about trivial amounts of spending when remain spent more, they hint darkly at Russian and other foreign interference, they thrive on the incompetence of this government and its inability to negotiate effectively and they have created a scenario where we need not 1 but 3 Acts of Parliament to leave plus a MV of course.
If they had been candid about their continued devotion to the EU and sought re-election on that basis, as in fairness the SNP and the Lib Dems did ( both of whom had poor election results), you could have some respect for them. The view that being in the EU is a good thing is a perfectly reasonable position. But they preferred to lie. They are contemptible.
The government has done absolutely nothing to reconcile Remain supporters to the referendum decision. It is the author of its own misfortune.
May has. Her deal is the least worst outcome possible for remainers. As @Kinabulu says, other than the fact of leaving what more could they ask for?
The deal was imposed by the EU. The government hasn’t offered a sausage to Remainers.
They are offering this deal. May has been willing to lose quite a number of cabinet ministers and to face down a vote of no confidence in her party to do so. She should be supported by rational people on both sides of the argument. Have you not said that if you were in Parliament you would vote for it?
I would vote for this deal. It’s abject but it delivers the Brexit that was campaigned for.
However, I can well understand how Remain supporters unreconciled to the vote might feel no obligation to support a deal which they regard as worse than the current terms and which, crucially, does not have the support of a majority of Leavers. Why should they compromise on something that no one actually wants?
I think it does have the support of the majority of leavers but there is a substantial and noisy minority that oppose it meaning May needs remainers to get it over the line
Well put. The reality is that the majority of remainers in Parliament who claimed to respect the decision in 2016 and were elected on manifestos that committed themselves to doing so are hypocrites and liars who search around for any excuse to go back on their promises. So they refight the 2016 campaign endlessly, they complain about trivial amounts of spending when remain spent more, they hint darkly at Russian and other foreign interference, they thrive on the incompetence of this government and its inability to negotiate effectively and they have created a scenario where we need not 1 but 3 Acts of Parliament to leave plus a MV of course.
If they had been candid about their continued devotion to the EU and sought re-election on that basis, as in fairness the SNP and the Lib Dems did ( both of whom had poor election results), you could have some respect for them. The view that being in the EU is a good thing is a perfectly reasonable position. But they preferred to lie. They are contemptible.
The government has done absolutely nothing to reconcile Remain supporters to the referendum decision. It is the author of its own misfortune.
May has. Her deal is the least worst outcome possible for remainers. As @Kinabulu says, other than the fact of leaving what more could they ask for?
The deal was imposed by the EU. The government hasn’t offered a sausage to Remainers.
They are offering this deal. May has been willing to lose quite a number of cabinet ministers and to face down a vote of no confidence in her party to do so. She should be supported by rational people on both sides of the argument. Have you not said that if you were in Parliament you would vote for it?
I would vote for this deal. It’s abject but it delivers the Brexit that was campaigned for.
However, I can well understand how Remain supporters unreconciled to the vote might feel no obligation to support a deal which they regard as worse than the current terms and which, crucially, does not have the support of a majority of Leavers. Why should they compromise on something that no one actually wants?
I think it's fair to say that most PB Remainers are in a similar place of reluctantly supporting the Deal in preference to No Deal. I am.
Well put. The reality is that the majority of remainers in Parliament who claimed to respect the decision in 2016 and were elected on manifestos that committed themselves to doing so are hypocrites and liars who search around for any excuse to go back on their promises. So they refight the 2016 campaign endlessly, they complain about trivial amounts of spending when remain spent more, they hint darkly at Russian and other foreign interference, they thrive on the incompetence of this government and its inability to negotiate effectively and they have created a scenario where we need not 1 but 3 Acts of Parliament to leave plus a MV of course.
If they had been candid about their continued devotion to the EU and sought re-election on that basis, as in fairness the SNP and the Lib Dems did ( both of whom had poor election results), you could have some respect for them. The view that being in the EU is a good thing is a perfectly reasonable position. But they preferred to lie. They are contemptible.
The government has done absolutely nothing to reconcile Remain supporters to the referendum decision. It is the author of its own misfortune.
May has. Her deal is the least worst outcome possible for remainers. As @Kinabulu says, other than the fact of leaving what more could they ask for?
The deal was imposed by the EU. The government hasn’t offered a sausage to Remainers.
They are offering this deal. May has been willing to lose quite a number of cabinet ministers and to face down a vote of no confidence in her party to do so. She should be supported by rational people on both sides of the argument. Have you not said that if you were in Parliament you would vote for it?
I would vote for this deal. It’s abject but it delivers the Brexit that was campaigned for.
However, I can well understand how Remain supporters unreconciled to the vote might feel no obligation to support a deal which they regard as worse than the current terms and which, crucially, does not have the support of a majority of Leavers. Why should they compromise on something that no one actually wants?
I think it does have the support of the majority of leavers but there is a substantial and noisy minority that oppose it meaning May needs remainers to get it over the line
Since there are more Remainers than Leavers in the HoC it twas ever thus.
Classy MM. I’m just disappointed that you’ve fallen for it. You’ve clearly made your bed. Hopefully all will be well. But she’s taken us down a dangerous path, it could have been avoided, it’s yours to own either way now.
I wish we were elsewhere. But if it is an ill-advised poorly-prepared No Deal or May's Shit Deal, I have to go with May's Shit Deal. But all involved with getting us to this point should be removed from any power and influence forthwith.
The alternative is an ill-conceived wish-list of Not Brexit. At least I'm confonting reality and making unpalatable choices. We had a vote to Leave. We need to honour that. The risk to democracy of not doing so is large and troubling.
Again, the people shouting loudest about the risks of No Deal Brexit are those Remainers who could prevent it.
May has offered nothing to Remainers, nothing. There is no reason for them to back the deal. Not even a fig leaf.
If you want people to put their name to the deal this really matters. Fear if something worse is not enough. Especially when the something else was avoidable.
Point is, the something that was once avoidable is (and has always been) the default position. May is exploiting that for her own ends. But she is also exploiting the very fears that those who decry it as an outcome express.
Meanwhile, much fannying about is not providing an alternative that enough will coalesce around. The Remainer ship circles the Hard Brexit whirlpool, getting ever closer to doom. And yet still that Remainer ship refuses to change course. "Steady as she goes...."
If May wants to throw a tantrum and crash the ship if people don’t do as they are told, that is entirely on her.
May is not Captain of the Remainer ship. It steers its own course to oblivion.
Captain Corbyn rarely gets above decks. He is present but not involved in its course.....
Well put. The reality is that the majority of remainers in Parliament who claimed to respect the decision in 2016 and were elected on manifestos that committed themselves to doing so are hypocrites and liars who search around for any excuse to go back on their promises. So they refight the 2016 campaign endlessly, they complain about trivial amounts of spending when remain spent more, they hint darkly at Russian and other foreign interference, they thrive on the incompetence of this government and its inability to negotiate effectively and they have created a scenario where we need not 1 but 3 Acts of Parliament to leave plus a MV of course.
If they had been candid about their continued devotion to the EU and sought re-election on that basis, as in fairness the SNP and the Lib Dems did ( both of whom had poor election results), you could have some respect for them. The view that being in the EU is a good thing is a perfectly reasonable position. But they preferred to lie. They are contemptible.
The government has done absolutely nothing to reconcile Remain supporters to the referendum decision. It is the author of its own misfortune.
May has. Her deal is the least worst outcome possible for remainers. As @Kinabulu says, other than the fact of leaving what more could they ask for?
The deal was imposed by the EU. The government hasn’t offered a sausage to Remainers.
They are offering this deal. May has been willing to lose quite a number of cabinet ministers and to face down a vote of no confidence in her party to do so. She should be supported by rational people on both sides of the argument. Have you not said that if you were in Parliament you would vote for it?
I would vote for this deal. It’s abject but it delivers the Brexit that was campaigned for.
However, I can well understand how Remain supporters unreconciled to the vote might feel no obligation to support a deal which they regard as worse than the current terms and which, crucially, does not have the support of a majority of Leavers. Why should they compromise on something that no one actually wants?
I think it does have the support of the majority of leavers but there is a substantial and noisy minority that oppose it meaning May needs remainers to get it over the line
Only 36 MPs who voted Leave in 2016 have declared support for the deal. I can provide you with lists of where they all stand if you like.
If the government lose a VONC I am not so sure the DUP would prefer a general election to propping up a Corbyn government instead. In the case of the latter they are still Kingmaker and can dictate terms, in the case of either a Tory or Corbyn majority government or a Corbyn and SNP government after a general election however the DUP and their agenda can be dismissed as irrelevant.
The DUP are also likely to have seen the Northern Ireland polls showing No Deal makes a united Ireland more likely, in some respects therefore a Corbyn style permanent Customs Union plus single market elements on workers' rights for the whole UK is better than the backstop for Northern Ireland alone for the DUP and also poses less of a threat to the Union. Notice too even John McDonnell joking about getting out his orange sash.
Do not rule out therefore PM Corbyn by the middle of next year, propped up by the SNP, the LDs, the DUP, Plaid and the Greens and BINO Brexit in a similar scenario to Spain now where the Socialists are in power without having won a general election and despite having significantly fewer MPs than the main conservatives due to manoueverings of minority parties in parliament
"For example, what would the DUP like best? My guess is that they would be very happy to have another general election to see the clock tick down on a no-deal Brexit and will vote accordingly"
But that General Election is also likely to unravel the unique arithmetic that gives the DUP their leverage. What they would like best is for a new Tory leader who will be alligned better with their own views on Brexit, whilst continuing to send pork by the shipload to NI. So no deal Brexit, May stepping down and a Leaver taking over will be just fine and dandy with the DUP.
I think that this is a very important point that is regularly given far less attention than it should be. When was the last time anyone cared what those troublesome MPs from NI thought? 1979?
Who can seriously doubt that the backstop would have been swept through with a plethora of platitudes and assurances for the greater good if May had got her 50+ majority. Given it is nearly 40 years since this last happened what are the odds on such an eventuality happening again after a GE?
The DUP have by happenstance found themselves with real power at exactly the time that they need it to protect their position in the Union. Whether they are doing that successfully or sensibly is not the issue: the point is that they are players. They would be crazy to give that up. Therefore they will not vote for a VonC unless it is certain to stop Mays deal coming into force. And even then...
That’s not the right question. The question is what the DUP want power for. My assessment is that they don’t want anything that would put Northern Ireland’s status in the UK in question and they want Brexit. If they can achieve both at once so much the better. A general election at the right time, eating up time on the clock, would be just peachy and well worth a few less influential years.
And who’s to say the next election will produce a conclusive result anyway? The polls currently suggest otherwise.
Chaos suits some people.
The very strong probability is that the next Parliament will not give a damn about what the DUP think about anything. And it’s not even just the backstop. The next Parliament may well impose gay marriage and abortion on NI along with more sincere efforts to integrate education. They have a lot to lose.
The DUP faces that risk every election. But it has the non-repeatable chance of a glittering prize right now. It will reach for it.
The DUP can be bought. That much we know. If Mrs May is serious why doesn't she just find out their price and pay it? The electoral arithmetic will never be as favourable again. This is a once in a lifetime chance to fill their pockets.
One scenario is that we leave without a deal, in the midst of a GE. The way I see it playing out then depends on the GE result. If the Tories get a majority or strong minority with the DUP again then they'll just keep ramrodding May's old deal through. If Corbyn gets in with a majority he'll renegotiate. If Corbyn + Minor parties is the only viable government then there will be a referendum.....
On Scottish independence
The SNP want single market and Customs Union, the only polls putting Yes ahead in Scotland are with No Deal hence MalcG backs the latter
Well put. The reality is that the majority of remainers in Parliament who claimed to respect the decision in 2016 and were elected on manifestos that committed themselves to doing so are hypocrites and liars who search around for any excuse to go back on their promises. So they refight the 2016 campaign endlessly, they complain about trivial amounts of spending when remain spent more, they hint darkly at Russian and other foreign interference, they thrive on the incompetence of this government and its inability to negotiate effectively and they have created a scenario where we need not 1 but 3 Acts of Parliament to leave plus a MV of course.
If they had been candid about their continued devotion to the EU and sought re-election on that basis, as in fairness the SNP and the Lib Dems did ( both of whom had poor election results), you could have some respect for them. The view that being in the EU is a good thing is a perfectly reasonable position. But they preferred to lie. They are contemptible.
The government has done absolutely nothing to reconcile Remain supporters to the referendum decision. It is the author of its own misfortune.
May has. Her deal is the least worst outcome possible for remainers. As @Kinabulu says, other than the fact of leaving what more could they ask for?
The deal was imposed by the EU. The government hasn’t offered a sausage to Remainers.
They are offering this deal. May has been willing to lose quite a number of cabinet ministers and to face down a vote of no confidence in her party to do so. She should be supported by rational people on both sides of the argument. Have you not said that if you were in Parliament you would vote for it?
I would vote for this deal. It’s abject but it delivers the Brexit that was campaigned for.
However, I can well understand how Remain supporters unreconciled to the vote might feel no obligation to support a deal which they regard as worse than the current terms and which, crucially, does not have the support of a majority of Leavers. Why should they compromise on something that no one actually wants?
I think it's fair to say that most PB Remainers are in a similar place of reluctantly supporting the Deal in preference to No Deal. I am.
If we had PB running the country rather than those clowns in Parliament the deal would have a huge majority and we could move on to more challenging issues.
Well put. The reality is that the majority of remainers in Parliament who claimed to respect the decision in 2016 and were elected on manifestos that committed themselves to doing so are hypocrites and liars who search around for any excuse to go back on their promises. So they refight the 2016 campaign endlessly, they complain about trivial amounts of spending when remain spent more, they hint darkly at Russian and other foreign interference, they thrive on the incompetence of this government and its inability to negotiate effectively and they have created a scenario where we need not 1 but 3 Acts of Parliament to leave plus a MV of course.
If they had been candid about their continued devotion to the EU and sought re-election on that basis, as in fairness the SNP and the Lib Dems did ( both of whom had poor election results), you could have some respect for them. The view that being in the EU is a good thing is a perfectly reasonable position. But they preferred to lie. They are contemptible.
The government has done absolutely nothing to reconcile Remain supporters to the referendum decision. It is the author of its own misfortune.
May has. Her deal is the least worst outcome possible for remainers. As @Kinabulu says, other than the fact of leaving what more could they ask for?
The deal was imposed by the EU. The government hasn’t offered a sausage to Remainers.
They are offering this deal. May has been willing to lose quite a number of cabinet ministers and to face down a vote of no confidence in her party to do so. She should be supported by rational people on both sides of the argument. Have you not said that if you were in Parliament you would vote for it?
I would vote for this deal. It’s abject but it delivers the Brexit that was campaigned for.
However, I can well understand how Remain supporters unreconciled to the vote might feel no obligation to support a deal which they regard as worse than the current terms and which, crucially, does not have the support of a majority of Leavers. Why should they compromise on something that no one actually wants?
I think it's fair to say that most PB Remainers are in a similar place of reluctantly supporting the Deal in preference to No Deal. I am.
Will be interesting when MPs start following your path.....
As Churchill might not have said "May's deal is the worst form of relationship with the EU, except for all the others."
It hands complete control to Brussels including effective administration over part of the UK. That i the DUP's objection. The Deal destroys democracy in NI. Shock news - even Remainers believe in democracy and wanting the best for the UK. The Deal does not provide this. The Deal does improve slightly if you are prepared to throw NI under the bus
Ok. So you think it is a democratic outrage to have to follow EU rules without having a say in making them.
It follows therefore that IYO any type of soft Brexit is a democratic outrage.
The treaty does 3 things. (1) Settles the bill. (2) Protects citizens' rights. (3) Guarantees an open border in Ireland.
Number 3 is problematic for leavers, yes, I see that. Because it steers the FTA to one of close alignment absent a high tech solution to the border.
But for remainers? What on earth is the problem with any of it? Do they not want to settle our liabilities? Do they not want to protect citizens' rights? Do they not want a close future relationship which ensures an open border in Ireland? It's a yes to all three, surely.
So what is going on here?
When pressed, the principal objection of remainers appears to be that we are 'giving up our voice' in EU decision making. Que? Of course we are! We're leaving. The clear and absurd inference is that they will only support a deal that retains our rights of membership. In other words, for them, brexit means remain.
C'mon. It's a nonsense.
Put simply: if leavers aren't prepared to support it, why should we?
Put even more simply, wake me up when remainers can tell me what they want.
Classy MM. I’m just disappointed that you’ve fallen for it. You’ve clearly made your bed. Hopefully all will be well. But she’s taken us down a dangerous path, it could have been avoided, it’s yours to own either way now.
I wish we were elsewhere. But if it is an ill-advised poorly-prepared No Deal or May's Shit Deal, I have to go with May's Shit Deal. But all involved with getting us to this point should be removed from any power and influence forthwith.
The alternative is an ill-conceived wish-list of Not Brexit. At least I'm confonting reality and making unpalatable choices. We had a vote to Leave. We need to honour that. The risk to democracy of not doing so is large and troubling.
Again, the people shouting loudest about the risks of No Deal Brexit are those Remainers who could prevent it.
May has offered nothing to Remainers, nothing. There is no reason for them to back the deal. Not even a fig leaf.
If you want people to put their name to the deal this really matters. Fear if something worse is not enough. Especially when the something else was avoidable.
Point is, the something that was once avoidable is (and has always been) the default position. May is exploiting that for her own ends. But she is also exploiting the very fears that those who decry it as an outcome express.
Meanwhile, much fannying about is not providing an alternative that enough will coalesce around. The Remainer ship circles the Hard Brexit whirlpool, getting ever closer to doom. And yet still that Remainer ship refuses to change course. "Steady as she goes...."
If May wants to throw a tantrum and crash the ship if people don’t do as they are told, that is entirely on her.
May is not Captain of the Remainer ship. It steers its own course to oblivion.
Captain Corbyn rarely gets above decks. He is present but not involved in its course.....
Really? I thought May was the Remainer who hobbled the Titans Of Brexit - Davis, Johnson, Fox etc? Surely she placed arch-Remainer Robbins to ensure that DexEU had no effect?
I seem to recall no shortage of posts along those lines ....
Classy MM. I’m just disappointed that you’ve fallen for it. You’ve clearly made your bed. Hopefully all will be well. But she’s taken us down a dangerous path, it could have been avoided, it’s yours to own either way now.
I wish we were elsewhere. But if it is an ill-advised poorly-prepared No Deal or May's Shit Deal, I have to go with May's Shit Deal. But all involved with getting us to this point should be removed from any power and influence forthwith.
The alternative is an ill-conceived wish-list of Not Brexit. At least I'm confonting reality and making unpalatable choices. We had a vote to Leave. We need to honour that. The risk to democracy of not doing so is large and troubling.
Again, the people shouting loudest about the risks of No Deal Brexit are those Remainers who could prevent it.
May has offered nothing to Remainers, nothing. There is no reason for them to back the deal. Not even a fig leaf.
If you want people to put their name to the deal this really matters. Fear if something worse is not enough. Especially when the something else was avoidable.
Head to head as Yougov and Deltapoll showed Remainers actually back the Deal if No Deal is the only alternative
For a Labour MP in a leave constituency I suspect they need to ensure that we leave with as little pain as possible. In a no deal exit every piece of pain will be pinned on their shoulders
A friend talked to one of these recently. The MP said that membership or its absence was pretty irrelevant to constituents in her northern patch - Leaving without major disruption would be fine with them, even most of the Remain voters, if only a government would then address their real problems.
Up to a point, this suggests she should vote for May's deal. But there isn't much positive incentive to strengthen May for a Labour MP, since the other half of the equation - a government that does something useful for northern deprived areas - is notably missing.
Well put. The reality is that the majority of remainers in Parliament who claimed to respect the decision in 2016 and were elected on manifestos that committed themselves to doing so are hypocrites and liars who search around for any excuse to go back on their promises. So they refight the 2016 campaign endlessly, they complain about trivial amounts of spending when remain spent more, they hint darkly at Russian and other foreign interference, they thrive on the incompetence of this government and its inability to negotiate effectively and they have created a scenario where we need not 1 but 3 Acts of Parliament to leave plus a MV of course.
If they had been candid about their continued devotion to the EU and sought re-election on that basis, as in fairness the SNP and the Lib Dems did ( both of whom had poor election results), you could have some respect for them. The view that being in the EU is a good thing is a perfectly reasonable position. But they preferred to lie. They are contemptible.
The government has done absolutely nothing to reconcile Remain supporters to the referendum decision. It is the author of its own misfortune.
May has. Her deal is the least worst outcome possible for remainers. As @Kinabulu says, other than the fact of leaving what more could they ask for?
The deal was imposed by the EU. The government hasn’t offered a sausage to Remainers.
They are offering this deal. May has been willing to lose quite a number of cabinet ministers and to face down a vote of no confidence in her party to do so. She should be supported by rational people on both sides of the argument. Have you not said that if you were in Parliament you would vote for it?
I would vote for this deal. It’s abject but it delivers the Brexit that was campaigned for.
However, I can well understand how Remain supporters unreconciled to the vote might feel no obligation to support a deal which they regard as worse than the current terms and which, crucially, does not have the support of a majority of Leavers. Why should they compromise on something that no one actually wants?
I think it's fair to say that most PB Remainers are in a similar place of reluctantly supporting the Deal in preference to No Deal. I am.
Yep.
But don't expect it to be the deal that puts the issue to bed.
The DUP can be bought. That much we know. If Mrs May is serious why doesn't she just find out their price and pay it? The electoral arithmetic will never be as favourable again. This is a once in a lifetime chance to fill their pockets.
As I've mentioned before, the tunnel/bridge combo linking (Northern) Ireland to Scotland would be a huge commitment they could extract. The billions it will cost are years down the line. She could cancel HS2 to pay for it. And get Varadkar to have the EU pull the back stop in exchange. Everyone happy. What's not to love?
Well put. The reality is that the majority of remainers in Parliament who claimed to respect the decision in 2016 and were elected on manifestos that committed themselves to doing so are hypocrites and liars who search around for any excuse to go back on their promises. So they refight the 2016 campaign endlessly, they complain about trivial amounts of spending when remain spent more, they hint darkly at Russian and other foreign interference, they thrive on the incompetence of this government and its inability to negotiate effectively and they have created a scenario where we need not 1 but 3 Acts of Parliament to leave plus a MV of course.
If they had been candid about their continued devotion to the EU and sought re-election on that basis, as in fairness the SNP and the Lib Dems did ( both of whom had poor election results), you could have some respect for them. The view that being in the EU is a good thing is a perfectly reasonable position. But they preferred to lie. They are contemptible.
The government has done absolutely nothing to reconcile Remain supporters to the referendum decision. It is the author of its own misfortune.
May has. Her deal is the least worst outcome possible for remainers. As @Kinabulu says, other than the fact of leaving what more could they ask for?
The deal was imposed by the EU. The government hasn’t offered a sausage to Remainers.
They are offering this deal. May has been willing to lose quite a number of cabinet ministers and to face down a vote of no confidence in her party to do so. She should be supported by rational people on both sides of the argument. Have you not said that if you were in Parliament you would vote for it?
I would vote for this deal. It’s abject but it delivers the Brexit that was campaigned for.
However, I can well understand how Remain supporters unreconciled to the vote might feel no obligation to support a deal which they regard as worse than the current terms and which, crucially, does not have the support of a majority of Leavers. Why should they compromise on something that no one actually wants?
I think it's fair to say that most PB Remainers are in a similar place of reluctantly supporting the Deal in preference to No Deal. I am.
I think it is also fair to say and the polls confirm No Dealers are in a place of reluctantly supporting the Deal in preference to Remain.
I think it's fair to say that most PB Remainers are in a similar place of reluctantly supporting the Deal in preference to No Deal. I am.
I support neither the Deal nor No Deal. Both are sub-optimal to a high degree IMO. No Deal is obviously the worst outcome of the two so Deal is better in that respect.
Having said that, a part of me would be fascinated to see the Leaver's reaction to the horrors of No Deal and it might be the only way to escape the nostalgia for our glory days and Imperial past.
Er... maybe Remainers don't support it because it means we Leave?
Bang.
And that is fine for you. Or me for that matter. I'm a remainer. Big remainer.
But I'm talking about the MPs. The ones who were elected on a promise to Brexit. The ones who made a big deal about respecting the result of the referendum. The ones who voted to trigger article 50 and implement a negotiated exit.
It does not sit well that they now reject the deal because it is not as good as not leaving.
(But yes, I do see the point that if leavers don't like it, why should we pretend to? It's a good point, and I wish it were made more often by the likes of Grieve and Soubry).
If the government lose a VONC I am not so sure the DUP would prefer a general election to propping up a Corbyn government instead. In the case of the latter they are still Kingmaker and can dictate terms, in the case of either a Tory or Corbyn majority government or a Corbyn and SNP government after a general election however the DUP and their agenda can be dismissed as irrelevant.
The DUP are also likely to have seen the Northern Ireland polls showing No Deal makes a united Ireland more likely, in some respects therefore a Corbyn style permanent Customs Union plus single market elements on workers' rights for the whole UK is better than the backstop for Northern Ireland alone for the DUP and also poses less of a threat to the Union. Notice too even John McDonnell joking about getting out his orange sash.
Do not rule out therefore PM Corbyn by the middle of next year, propped up by the SNP, the LDs, the DUP, Plaid and the Greens and BINO Brexit in a similar scenario to Spain now where the Socialists are in power without having won a general election and despite having significantly fewer MPs than the main conservatives due to manoueverings of minority parties in parliament
Well put. The reality is that the majority of remainers in Parliament who claimed to respect the decision in 2016 and were elected on manifestos that committed themselves to doing so are hypocrites and liars who search around for any excuse to go back on their promises. So they refight the 2016 campaign endlessly, they complain about trivial amounts of spending when remain spent more, they hint darkly at Russian and other foreign interference, they thrive on the incompetence of this government and its inability to negotiate effectively and they have created a scenario where we need not 1 but 3 Acts of Parliament to leave plus a MV of course.
If they had been candid about their continued devotion to the EU and sought re-election on that basis, as in fairness the SNP and the Lib Dems did ( both of whom had poor election results), you could have some respect for them. The view that being in the EU is a good thing is a perfectly reasonable position. But they preferred to lie. They are contemptible.
The government has done absolutely nothing to reconcile Remain supporters to the referendum decision. It is the author of its own misfortune.
May has. Her deal is the least worst outcome possible for remainers. As @Kinabulu says, other than the fact of leaving what more could they ask for?
The deal was imposed by the EU. The government hasn’t offered a sausage to Remainers.
They are offering this deal. May has been willing to lose quite a number of cabinet ministers and to face down a vote of no confidence in her party to do so. She should be supported by rational people on both sides of the argument. Have you not said that if you were in Parliament you would vote for it?
I would vote for this deal. It’s abject but it delivers the Brexit that was campaigned for.
However, I can well understand how Remain supporters unreconciled to the vote might feel no obligation to support a deal which they regard as worse than the current terms and which, crucially, does not have the support of a majority of Leavers. Why should they compromise on something that no one actually wants?
I think it's fair to say that most PB Remainers are in a similar place of reluctantly supporting the Deal in preference to No Deal. I am.
I think it is also fair to say and the polls confirm No Dealers are in a place of reluctantly supporting the Deal in preference to Remain.
Classy MM. I’m just disappointed that you’ve fallen for it. You’ve clearly made your bed. Hopefully all will be well. But she’s taken us down a dangerous path, it could have been avoided, it’s yours to own either way now.
I wish we were elsewhere. But if it is an ill-advised poorly-prepared No Deal or May's Shit Deal, I have to go with May's Shit Deal. But all involved with getting us to this point should be removed from any power and influence forthwith.
The alternative is an ill-conceived wish-list of Not Brexit. At least I'm confonting reality and making unpalatable choices. We had a vote to Leave. We need to honour that. The risk to democracy of not doing so is large and troubling.
Again, the people shouting loudest about the risks of No Deal Brexit are those Remainers who could prevent it.
May has offered nothing to Remainers, nothing. There is no reason for them to back the deal. Not even a fig leaf.
If you want people to put their name to the deal this really matters. Fear if something worse is not enough. Especially when the something else was avoidable.
Point is, the something that was once avoidable is (and has always been) the default position. May is exploiting that for her own ends. But she is also exploiting the very fears that those who decry it as an outcome express.
Meanwhile, much fannying about is not providing an alternative that enough will coalesce around. The Remainer ship circles the Hard Brexit whirlpool, getting ever closer to doom. And yet still that Remainer ship refuses to change course. "Steady as she goes...."
If May wants to throw a tantrum and crash the ship if people don’t do as they are told, that is entirely on her.
May is not Captain of the Remainer ship. It steers its own course to oblivion.
Captain Corbyn rarely gets above decks. He is present but not involved in its course.....
Really? I thought May was the Remainer who hobbled the Titans Of Brexit - Davis, Johnson, Fox etc? Surely she placed arch-Remainer Robbins to ensure that DexEU had no effect?
I seem to recall no shortage of posts along those lines ....
In practice, there is no single ship of Remain - nor of Brexit. We just have 650 or so individual ships, bobbing about, some in loose flotillas, but none in fighting formation. All wanting to be one of the Dunkirk Little Ships, none wanting to be in the routed Armada.....
Yet wind and tide will force them around May's Ship of State, for fear of the rocks and reefs beyond.
For a Labour MP in a leave constituency I suspect they need to ensure that we leave with as little pain as possible. In a no deal exit every piece of pain will be pinned on their shoulders
A friend talked to one of these recently. The MP said that membership or its absence was pretty irrelevant to constituents in her northern patch - Leaving without major disruption would be fine with them, even most of the Remain voters, if only a government would then address their real problems.
Up to a point, this suggests she should vote for May's deal. But there isn't much positive incentive to strengthen May for a Labour MP, since the other half of the equation - a government that does something useful for northern deprived areas - is notably missing.
Sounds about right. The reality is that whatever you think of the EU it isn't particularly intrusive and you can go years without noticing any effect from it.
Well put. The reality is that the majority of remainers in Parliament who claimed to respect the decision in 2016 and were elected on manifestos that committed themselves to doing so are hypocrites and liars who search around for any excuse to go back on their They are contemptible.
The government has done absolutely nothing to reconcile Remain supporters to the referendum decision. It is the author of its own misfortune.
May has. Her deal is the least worst outcome possible for remainers. As @Kinabulu says, other than the fact of leaving what more could they ask for?
The deal was imposed by the EU. The government hasn’t offered a sausage to Remainers.
They are offering this deal. May has been willing to lose quite a number of cabinet ministers and to face down a vote of no confidence in her party to do so. She should be supported by rational people on both sides of the argument. Have you not said that if you were in Parliament you would vote for it?
I would vote for this deal. It’s abject but it delivers the Brexit that was campaigned for.
However, I can well understand how Remain supporters unreconciled to the vote might feel no obligation to support a deal which they regard as worse than the current terms and which, crucially, does not have the support of a majority of Leavers. Why should they compromise on something that no one actually wants?
I think it's fair to say that most PB Remainers are in a similar place of reluctantly supporting the Deal in preference to No Deal. I am.
I think it is also fair to say and the polls confirm No Dealers are in a place of reluctantly supporting the Deal in preference to Remain.
And yet the ERG maintain the opposite. Idiots.
If the only alternative was a Deal v Remain EUref2 to the Deal even the ERG may fall in line
I'd never heard the pennies on a railway line before. Has anyone tried it? I've sometimes wondered what would come out the other end if Jacob Rees Mogg fell under a steam roller
My mother did, as a child, in a more innocent age. You just get very flat pennies.
But of course playing on railway tracks is both illegal, and extremely dangerous.
It's a lot more dangerous now to play near railway lines. When I used to do it, 70 years ago trains were a lot noisier. You could hear them coming for quite a while before they arrived.
Just to add, as the EU has made abundantly clear, this is the only deal possible that respects TMay's 'red lines'. Those red lines were wholly determined by leaver concerns, without any reference to - or attempt to reconcile - remainers. And now the leavers, many of whom played an active part in negotiating it, have decided they don't like it. It's a bit rich to expect remainers to ride to the rescue.
Is the Withdrawal Treaty materially impacted by her red lines? Money, Citizens, Irish Border, these matters had to be settled.
The FTA, yes, of course. But that is all non-binding and aspirational, i.e. up for grabs.
When I talk about 'The Deal', I mean the Withdrawal Treaty.
If they had been candid about their continued devotion to the EU and sought re-election on that basis, as in fairness the SNP and the Lib Dems did ( both of whom had poor election results), you could have some respect for them. The view that being in the EU is a good thing is a perfectly reasonable position. But they preferred to lie. They are contemptible.
The government has done absolutely nothing to reconcile Remain supporters to the referendum decision. It is the author of its own misfortune.
May has. Her deal is the least worst outcome possible for remainers. As @Kinabulu says, other than the fact of leaving what more could they ask for?
The deal was imposed by the EU. The government hasn’t offered a sausage to Remainers.
They are offering this deal. May has been willing to lose quite a number of cabinet ministers and to face down a vote of no confidence in her party to do so. She should be supported by rational people on both sides of the argument. Have you not said that if you were in Parliament you would vote for it?
I would vote for this deal. It’s abject but it delivers the Brexit that was campaigned for.
However, I can well understand how Remain supporters unreconciled to the vote might feel no obligation to support a deal which they regard as worse than the current terms and which, crucially, does not have the support of a majority of Leavers. Why should they compromise on something that no one actually wants?
I think it's fair to say that most PB Remainers are in a similar place of reluctantly supporting the Deal in preference to No Deal. I am.
If we had PB running the country rather than those clowns in Parliament the deal would have a huge majority and we could move on to more challenging issues.
It's a good point. Maybe we could turn PB into a Citzens' Assembly?
Trouble is, if we had any influence or power PB would beging to attract the wrong sort rather than all us lovely, politically diverse people!
The risk to MPs' careers of voting against their parties might be overstated. First, there might not be time for deselection and replacement before an election. More importantly, if there is a new leader, then voting against the old one might no longer be called treason.
The risk to MPs' careers of voting against their parties might be overstated. First, there might not be time for deselection and replacement before an election. More importantly, if there is a new leader, then voting against the old one might no longer be called treason.
No - CLPs and Tory Associations would react immediately to such behaviour and the MPs concerned would place themselves beyond the pale. As the 2017 election showed, new candidates could be chosen at very short notice.MPs who vote against their party on a VONC would fight any general election as Independents - were they to stand at all.
Er... maybe Remainers don't support it because it means we Leave?
Bang.
And that is fine for you. Or me for that matter. I'm a remainer. Big remainer.
But I'm talking about the MPs. The ones who were elected on a promise to Brexit. The ones who made a big deal about respecting the result of the referendum. The ones who voted to trigger article 50 and implement a negotiated exit.
It does not sit well that they now reject the deal because it is not as good as not leaving.
(But yes, I do see the point that if leavers don't like it, why should we pretend to? It's a good point, and I wish it were made more often by the likes of Grieve and Soubry).
How many committed remainers do you think there are in the current Conservative Party? 10? 20? I can think of 4 off the top of my head but I’m sure there are more. May won her vote of confidence with a majority of 83. That means a majority of leavers supported her and her deal. It may not sound like that but that is the reality.
Classy MM. I’m just disappointed that you’ve fallen for it. You’ve clearly made your bed. Hopefully all will be well. But she’s taken us down a dangerous path, it could have been avoided, it’s yours to own either way now.
I wish we were elsewhere. But if it is an ill-advised poorly-prepared No Deal or May's Shit Deal, I have to go with May's Shit Deal. But all involved with getting us to this point should be removed from any power and influence forthwith.
The alternative is an ill-conceived wish-list of Not Brexit. At least I'm confonting reality and making unpalatable choices. We had a vote to Leave. We need to honour that. The risk to democracy of not doing so is large and troubling.
Again, the people shouting loudest about the risks of No Deal Brexit are those Remainers who could prevent it.
May has offered nothing to Remainers, nothing. There is no reason for them to back the deal. Not even a fig leaf.
If you want people to put their name to the deal this really matters. Fear if something worse is not enough. Especially when the something else was avoidable.
Head to head as Yougov and Deltapoll showed Remainers actually back the Deal if No Deal is the only alternative
Of course. Why not. A coherent plan from Leavers which sets out what the plan for No Deal was might help. At the moment there's a sort of incoherent promise that 'it really will be all right. Honestly'! And since one of the people saying 'Honestly' is Boris Johnson.......,
If they had been candid about their continued devotion to the EU and sought re-election on that basis, as in fairness the SNP and the Lib Dems did ( both of whom had poor election results), you could have some respect for them. The view that being in the EU is a good thing is a perfectly reasonable position. But they preferred to lie. They are contemptible.
The government has done absolutely nothing to reconcile Remain supporters to the referendum decision. It is the author of its own misfortune.
May has. Her deal is the least worst outcome possible for remainers. As @Kinabulu says, other than the fact of leaving what more could they ask for?
The deal was imposed by the EU. The government hasn’t offered a sausage to Remainers.
They are offering this deal. May has been willing to lose quite a number of cabinet ministers and to face down a vote of no confidence in her party to do so. She should be supported by rational people on both sides of the argument. Have you not said that if you were in Parliament you would vote for it?
I would vote for this deal. It’s abject but it delivers the Brexit that was campaigned for.
However, I can well understand how Remain supporters unreconciled to the vote might feel no obligation to support a deal which they regard as worse than the current terms and which, crucially, does not have the support of a majority of Leavers. Why should they compromise on something that no one actually wants?
I think it's fair to say that most PB Remainers are in a similar place of reluctantly supporting the Deal in preference to No Deal. I am.
If we had PB running the country rather than those clowns in Parliament the deal would have a huge majority and we could move on to more challenging issues.
It's a good point. Maybe we could turn PB into a Citzens' Assembly?
Trouble is, if we had any influence or power PB would beging to attract the wrong sort rather than all us lovely, politically diverse people!
Oh we couldn’t have that. Back to the drawing board!
The government hasn’t offered a sausage to Remainers.
I agree, if talking about the tone and rhetoric of TM over the piece.
But just looking at this Withdrawal Treaty. Money, Citizens, IRE Border.
What more could it be offering Remainers?
A vision that includes Remain aspirations. The withdrawal treaty is largely the EU’s creation.
If Leavers don’t like it, why should Remainers cooperate on this staging post to the shrivelling of the things that make Britain a great place to be? There are answers but they aren’t knockout ones.
Sounds about right. The reality is that whatever you think of the EU it isn't particularly intrusive and you can go years without noticing any effect from it.
Yes - people are fed up with the ongoing debate not just because it's gone on so long but because fundamentally most of them don't care that much. If it was World War 2, sure, nobody ever said it was irrelevant to them throughout the six years. But EU membership? Meh.
I'm very interested in the EU because I've spent half my life on the Continent and reckon that we're all much of a muchness and should be close to a single country. But that's not in the least typical, any more than the ultra-ERGer who feels that being able to negotiate new trade deals represents a dramatic turning point in our history. A shop assistant in Mansfield can be forgiven for thinking we're both nutters and completely irrelevant to her.
Both Corbyn and May will whip against a centrist parent Soubry-Cable-Umuna govt if it comes down to it.
Which would be a fairly irrelevant detail.
The obvious and traditional solution is a fresh General Election. When there is a national crisis and there is no majority for any option the only solution is to elect a fresh sent of MPs. The reason why this isn't happening is that Tory MPs don't wish to be led by May and Labour MPs don't wish to be led by Corbyn. Neither set of MPs can agree on who should replace the current leader nor is there a consensus in thinking between MPs and the wider party memberships.
Which is where a unity government comes in. Tory MPs don't want a majority Tory government led by May, Johnson or Rees-Mogg. Labour MPs don't want a majority Labour government led by Corbyn. There are enough WhatsApp Tory and Labour MPs to hold a majority with the SNP and LibDems, they just need to agree a leader.
I am deadly serious about this WhatsApp group. Might make for some very long odds options for next PM...
There isn’t much time for a general election, and a fair likelihood of its returining a parliament with much the same deficiencies as this one.
A unity government is of course a possibility. I just don’t think it very likely to get off the ground in the very limited time available.
I think one reason one might get a brief unity government is the lack of time available. As well as keeping the country ticking over they would specifically be charged with going to Brussels to ask for an Article 50 extension (or unilaterally revoke) to allow for either a general election or second referendum and new negotiations so we can come to an unequivocal decision there's a majority for.
Normally, obviously, you'd go for a general election - but with both parties so split this seems an impossibility. In a GE Labour would either have to go full remain or, more likely, for a People's Vote - as Corbyn's 'we'll Brexit but better' stance just won't hold up. Never mind losing voters - the party would fracture before he got to an election. With May gone, the Tories divisions will be more apparent than even now - as lots of MPs reluctantly backing May's deal as making the best of a bad situation will shift into the respective hard Brexit/soft, remain camps.
I also think that kind of mess will diminish the negative elements to a PV. Hardcore Brexiteers will kick up a fuss - but MPs can honestly say to everyone else that they really didn't have any other options that a) tried to respect the notion of people having their say and b) didn't cause immense and irreparable harm to the country politically and economically.
Er... maybe Remainers don't support it because it means we Leave?
Bang.
And that is fine for you. Or me for that matter. I'm a remainer. Big remainer.
But I'm talking about the MPs. The ones who were elected on a promise to Brexit. The ones who made a big deal about respecting the result of the referendum. The ones who voted to trigger article 50 and implement a negotiated exit.
It does not sit well that they now reject the deal because it is not as good as not leaving.
(But yes, I do see the point that if leavers don't like it, why should we pretend to? It's a good point, and I wish it were made more often by the likes of Grieve and Soubry).
How many committed remainers do you think there are in the current Conservative Party? 10? 20? I can think of 4 off the top of my head but I’m sure there are more. May won her vote of confidence with a majority of 83. That means a majority of leavers supported her and her deal. It may not sound like that but that is the reality.
If you are defining “Leavers” as people who would tolerate this deal, that’s a self-fulfilling definition.
The DUP can be bought. That much we know. If Mrs May is serious why doesn't she just find out their price and pay it? The electoral arithmetic will never be as favourable again. This is a once in a lifetime chance to fill their pockets.
As I've mentioned before, the tunnel/bridge combo linking (Northern) Ireland to Scotland would be a huge commitment they could extract. The billions it will cost are years down the line. She could cancel HS2 to pay for it. And get Varadkar to have the EU pull the back stop in exchange. Everyone happy. What's not to love?
Perhaps it is time for all of us to build bridges.
As was noted in last night's thread, things have gotten extremely coarse and combative over the holiday season, from some posters more than others but we are all of us to blame.
The intemperate language and lack of respect for others' opinions shown by some posters has convinced me that there really is no hope. Whether we remain or leave, have another referendum or don't, nothing will be solved.
The country is in an (albeit relatively civil) civil war, and I do not see an end to it.
The government hasn’t offered a sausage to Remainers.
I agree, if talking about the tone and rhetoric of TM over the piece.
But just looking at this Withdrawal Treaty. Money, Citizens, IRE Border.
What more could it be offering Remainers?
One of May’s greatest weaknesses ( and there are several) is her complete inability to make or grow a consensus or team which supports her positions. She avoids taking a position as long as possible as a means of keeping things together (pissing off many potential supporters in doing so) and then ex cathedra announces the solution, stubbornly refusing to shift. We saw this in the election campaign and in the Brexit negotiations. Alastair complains she has done nothing to bring remainers on board. Most of her leavers have actually gone overboard in frustration and irritation. As I think MD said downthread to piss off both sides in a binary question takes a rare talent.
I am not opposing the deal: quite the opposite, in fact. I would prefer "Remain" but that is not on the table and I try not to select fictions. Based on all information presently available the decision is correct.
I too would love Remain but I do not like the route to Remain from here.
For all the future gazing that goes on, the only way to find out with any degree of certainty what Leave means is to do it.
If it's palpably bad, we rejoin. And if it isn't, well ok.
Perhaps it is time for all of us to build bridges.
As was noted in last night's thread, things have gotten extremely coarse and combative over the holiday season, from some posters more than others but we are all of us to blame.
The intemperate language and lack of respect for others' opinions shown by some posters has convinced me that there really is no hope. Whether we remain or leave, have another referendum or don't, nothing will be solved.
The country is in an (albeit relatively civil) civil war, and I do not see an end to it.
I post a lot less than i used to because of the change of tone and i know i am not the only one.
Classy MM. I’m just disappointed that you’ve fallen for it. You’ve clearly made your bed. Hopefully all will be well. But she’s taken us down a dangerous path, it could have been avoided, it’s yours to own either way now.
I wish we were elsewhere. But if it is an ill-advised poorly-prepared No Deal or May's Shit Deal, I have to go with May's Shit Deal. But all involved with getting us to this point should be removed from any power and influence forthwith.
The alternative is an ill-conceived wish-list of Not Brexit. At least I'm confonting reality and making unpalatable choices. We had a vote to Leave. We need to honour that. The risk to democracy of not doing so is large and troubling.
Again, the people shouting loudest about the risks of No Deal Brexit are those Remainers who could prevent it.
May has offered nothing to Remainers, nothing. There is no reason for them to back the deal. Not even a fig leaf.
If you want people to put their name to the deal this really matters. Fear if something worse is not enough. Especially when the something else was avoidable.
Point is, the something that was once avoidable is (and has always been) the default position. May is exploiting that for her own ends. But she is also exploiting the very fears that those who decry it as an outcome express.
Meanwhile, much fannying about is not providing an alternative that enough will coalesce around. The Remainer ship circles the Hard Brexit whirlpool, getting ever closer to doom. And yet still that Remainer ship refuses to change course. "Steady as she goes...."
If May wants to throw a tantrum and crash the ship if people don’t do as they are told, that is entirely on her.
May is not Captain of the Remainer ship. It steers its own course to oblivion.
Captain Corbyn rarely gets above decks. He is present but not involved in its course.....
The Captain was a duck With a packet on his back And when the ship began to move The Captain said "quack quack"
There was a vox pop on the radio this am with some diddy saying 'they might be terrorists, they look like families but who knows?'
Javid may be crap on all available evidence, but he's certainly attuned to the dog whistles de jour.
221 since the start of November according to the BBC. Which is still a small number when some estimate that there may be 1m illegal immigrants in London alone.
I quite like Javid but I thought that his decision not to deploy further ships in the Channel was pretty disgusting. He is basically saying I would rather people drown than us risk more coming on the back of an improved prospect of rescue. It is profoundly immoral.
There was a vox pop on the radio this am with some diddy saying 'they might be terrorists, they look like families but who knows?'
Javid may be crap on all available evidence, but he's certainly attuned to the dog whistles de jour.
221 since the start of November according to the BBC. Which is still a small number when some estimate that there may be 1m illegal immigrants in London alone.
I quite like Javid but I thought that his decision not to deploy further ships in the Channel was pretty disgusting. He is basically saying I would rather people drown than us risk more coming on the back of an improved prospect of rescue. It is profoundly immoral.
The DUP can be bought. That much we know. If Mrs May is serious why doesn't she just find out their price and pay it? The electoral arithmetic will never be as favourable again. This is a once in a lifetime chance to fill their pockets.
As I've mentioned before, the tunnel/bridge combo linking (Northern) Ireland to Scotland would be a huge commitment they could extract. The billions it will cost are years down the line. She could cancel HS2 to pay for it. And get Varadkar to have the EU pull the back stop in exchange. Everyone happy. What's not to love?
That's quite an incredible comment. The cost and complexities of a fixed link between NI and mainland Scotland are fantastic, and would make the Channel Tunnel look easy. The economics of it are p*ss poor as well, especially as you'd have to build the link from Kintyre to the Central Belt.
There was a vox pop on the radio this am with some diddy saying 'they might be terrorists, they look like families but who knows?'
Javid may be crap on all available evidence, but he's certainly attuned to the dog whistles de jour.
221 since the start of November according to the BBC. Which is still a small number when some estimate that there may be 1m illegal immigrants in London alone.
I quite like Javid but I thought that his decision not to deploy further ships in the Channel was pretty disgusting. He is basically saying I would rather people drown than us risk more coming on the back of an improved prospect of rescue. It is profoundly immoral.
How many committed remainers do you think there are in the current Conservative Party? 10? 20? I can think of 4 off the top of my head but I’m sure there are more. May won her vote of confidence with a majority of 83. That means a majority of leavers supported her and her deal. It may not sound like that but that is the reality.
Yes, 'hard core' remainers a dozen or so. Allen, Greening, Soubry, Grieve, JoJo, Sam G, they huddle together top right.
As for the leavers rejecting the deal, I mean the leading lights in that movement, the real freedom fighters, Banks, BoJo, Farage, Mogg, Raab, IDS, Patterson, Davis, Dorries, Jenkyns, those crazy cats.
I don't know whether GW is so completely fucked in the head that he actually believes this swill or he is so venal that he is spewing it for the benefit of the desiccated nationalists who will decide the next tory leadership campaign.
Mr. Roger, I think it emerged a couple of months ago, but Miss Plato actually passed away around June/July. She was ill. As you say, she wasn't very old.
That’s extremely sad to hear, and not old at all, only early 50s from what she posted here. Someone who was fun to engage with even when we disagreed and one of the first to welcome me (after your good self) to this forum when I first posted. RIP.
There was a vox pop on the radio this am with some diddy saying 'they might be terrorists, they look like families but who knows?'
Javid may be crap on all available evidence, but he's certainly attuned to the dog whistles de jour.
221 since the start of November according to the BBC. Which is still a small number when some estimate that there may be 1m illegal immigrants in London alone.
I quite like Javid but I thought that his decision not to deploy further ships in the Channel was pretty disgusting. He is basically saying I would rather people drown than us risk more coming on the back of an improved prospect of rescue. It is profoundly immoral.
Well to be fair in the pecking order of Western military and diplomatic power while the US leads we are just behind, helped by Commonwealth ties, though France under Macron is catching up fast
That's quite an incredible comment. The cost and complexities of a fixed link between NI and mainland Scotland are fantastic, and would make the Channel Tunnel look easy. The economics of it are p*ss poor as well, especially as you'd have to build the link from Kintyre to the Central Belt.
It'd be from Galloway if they ever did it. Apparently something like £20bn, including dealing with the old WW2 explosives dump :-)
There was a vox pop on the radio this am with some diddy saying 'they might be terrorists, they look like families but who knows?'
Javid may be crap on all available evidence, but he's certainly attuned to the dog whistles de jour.
221 since the start of November according to the BBC. Which is still a small number when some estimate that there may be 1m illegal immigrants in London alone.
I quite like Javid but I thought that his decision not to deploy further ships in the Channel was pretty disgusting. He is basically saying I would rather people drown than us risk more coming on the back of an improved prospect of rescue. It is profoundly immoral.
Well to be fair in the pecking order of Western military and diplomatic power while the US leads we are just behind, helped by Commonwealth ties, though France under Macron is catching up fast
As far as moral leadership is concerned, in many areas Canada and New Zealand are better role models than May's Britain.
Were a General Election to come about , Labour would simply decline to engage on Brexit to any significant extent. They would seek to change the subject - as happened in both 2017 and February 1974 - by raising other issues to which voters can much more readily relate.The chances of managing that over a six week campaign period seem good to me. People wish to move on!
I don't know whether GW is so completely fucked in the head that he actually believes this swill or he is so venal that he is spewing it for the benefit of the desiccated nationalists who will decide the next tory leadership campaign.
GW clearly think he is the next big thing, but here he is channeling the Commenwealth Brexiteer fantasy.
There was a vox pop on the radio this am with some diddy saying 'they might be terrorists, they look like families but who knows?'
Javid may be crap on all available evidence, but he's certainly attuned to the dog whistles de jour.
221 since the start of November according to the BBC. Which is still a small number when some estimate that there may be 1m illegal immigrants in London alone.
I quite like Javid but I thought that his decision not to deploy further ships in the Channel was pretty disgusting. He is basically saying I would rather people drown than us risk more coming on the back of an improved prospect of rescue. It is profoundly immoral.
Well to be fair in the pecking order of Western military and diplomatic power while the US leads we are just behind, helped by Commonwealth ties, though France under Macron is catching up fast
We are “just behind” the United States in the same way as Accrington Stanley are just behind Man City. We don’t have even 1/10th of their capability or reach and we are deluding ourselves to pretend otherwise.
One of May’s greatest weaknesses ( and there are several) is her complete inability to make or grow a consensus or team which supports her positions. She avoids taking a position as long as possible as a means of keeping things together (pissing off many potential supporters in doing so) and then ex cathedra announces the solution, stubbornly refusing to shift. We saw this in the election campaign and in the Brexit negotiations. Alastair complains she has done nothing to bring remainers on board. Most of her leavers have actually gone overboard in frustration and irritation. As I think MD said downthread to piss off both sides in a binary question takes a rare talent.
Mmm.
“Such resilience!”
“How on earth does she keep going?”
“What a bloody amazing woman.”
Hard to understand the gushing praise. I wonder if it is due to gender. Imagine that the PM behaving in this same way in these same circumstances was instead a sturdy looking man of late middle-age, such as Philip Hammond. Would he be as admired? I suspect not.
No, I don't like her at all. One dimensional, rigid, addicted to sterile soundbites.
But in this case, I am rooting for her. The deal is IMO about the best achievable given the imbalance in negotiating power between the UK and the EU, and the need to end FOM but not trash the economy.
I think that TM knows this and it is no surprise that she is fighting tooth & nail, using every trick in the book, to get it through. It would be a dereliction if she wasn't.
Well to be fair in the pecking order of Western military and diplomatic power while the US leads we are just behind, helped by Commonwealth ties, though France under Macron is catching up fast
"just behind"
US Navy escorts:230 RN escorts: 17
Geography means we aren't that well integrated with the preeminent commonwealth military (Australia) so we rarely exercise with them. Most of the UK-Australian (and NZ to a lesser extent) officer exchange programs have been stopped as the exchangees had a habit doing a lateral transfers into the ADF and not coming back.
There was a vox pop on the radio this am with some diddy saying 'they might be terrorists, they look like families but who knows?'
Javid may be crap on all available evidence, but he's certainly attuned to the dog whistles de jour.
221 since the start of November according to the BBC. Which is still a small number when some estimate that there may be 1m illegal immigrants in London alone.
I quite like Javid but I thought that his decision not to deploy further ships in the Channel was pretty disgusting. He is basically saying I would rather people drown than us risk more coming on the back of an improved prospect of rescue. It is profoundly immoral.
Well to be fair in the pecking order of Western military and diplomatic power while the US leads we are just behind, helped by Commonwealth ties, though France under Macron is catching up fast
We are “just behind” the United States in the same way as Accrington Stanley are just behind Man City. We don’t have even 1/10th of their capability or reach and we are deluding ourselves to pretend otherwise.
Accrington Stanley are, though, getting better and catching up.
One of May’s greatest weaknesses ( and there are several) is her complete inability to make or grow a consensus or team which supports her positions. She avoids taking a position as long as possible as a means of keeping things together (pissing off many potential supporters in doing so) and then ex cathedra announces the solution, stubbornly refusing to shift. We saw this in the election campaign and in the Brexit negotiations. Alastair complains she has done nothing to bring remainers on board. Most of her leavers have actually gone overboard in frustration and irritation. As I think MD said downthread to piss off both sides in a binary question takes a rare talent.
Mmm.
“Such resilience!”
“How on earth does she keep going?”
“What a bloody amazing woman.”
Hard to understand the gushing praise. I wonder if it is due to gender. Imagine that the PM behaving in this same way in these same circumstances was instead a sturdy looking man of late middle-age, such as Philip Hammond. Would he be as admired? I suspect not.
No, I don't like her at all. One dimensional, rigid, addicted to sterile soundbites.
But in this case, I am rooting for her. The deal is IMO about the best achievable given the imbalance in negotiating power between the UK and the EU, and the need to end FOM but not trash the economy.
I think that TM knows this and it is no surprise that she is fighting tooth. & nail, using every trick in the book, to get it through. It would be a dereliction if she wasn't.
I am also (albeit through gritted teeth). I agree she is doing what she should be doing in the national interest (having exhausted most of the alternatives).
Most of the time most MPs will do the thing that is most likely to give them most chance of remaining an MP. From here, for Tory MPs that means voting to ensure that the UK leaves the EU on 29th March 2019 and for Labour MPs it is making sure to do what Jeremy tells them to do. Thus, a government led by Theresa May will take us out of the EU on 29th March 2019. The only issue is whether it will be under her deal or No Deal. May would prefer the former, Corbyn the latter. It could be that Jeremy is the one who gets his way.
Good for JC, particularly if he can in future plausibly claim not to have been involved, so his hands would be "clean".
No Deal is a fantasy that does seem to appeal mostly to the kind of wealthy, privileged people who will suffer few of its consequences.
No Deal appeals most to wealthy, privileged, home owning, retired people for whom a recession, rising unemployment and the threat of negative equity and home repossessions is less of a risk. Even a lot of City Workers will lose their jobs under No Deal, at least if they want to stay working in the UK
Have you any evidence to support your fantasy, preferably not CCHQ propaganda as well.
That's quite an incredible comment. The cost and complexities of a fixed link between NI and mainland Scotland are fantastic, and would make the Channel Tunnel look easy. The economics of it are p*ss poor as well, especially as you'd have to build the link from Kintyre to the Central Belt.
It'd be from Galloway if they ever did it. Apparently something like £20bn, including dealing with the old WW2 explosives dump :-)
Comments
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gauleiter
Plus it reinforces the impression that some Brits continually hark back to the war. No wonder this country struggles when a proportion of the population insist on living in the past. Get over it!
And who’s to say the next election will produce a conclusive result anyway? The polls currently suggest otherwise.
Chaos suits some people.
The Deal does improve slightly if you are prepared to throw NI under the bus
A cast iron way of unilaterally opting out of the backstop? That's undeliverable. Since there would then not be a backstop.
If they had been candid about their continued devotion to the EU and sought re-election on that basis, as in fairness the SNP and the Lib Dems did ( both of whom had poor election results), you could have some respect for them. The view that being in the EU is a good thing is a perfectly reasonable position. But they preferred to lie. They are contemptible.
In brief, she came to power alienating Remainers and giving Leavers unrealistic expectations of what she could negotiate. So now both groups see the deal as a betrayal in different ways.
Maybe it was my ' running through the fields of wheat' moment
I would like to hear more of that and less of 'we cannot support it because it is not as good as membership'.
In brief, I would start from identifying the system’s capabilities. The Home Office is famously poor at processing immigration applications and adding another 3 million would seem unwise in the extreme unless absolutely necessary.
On that basis I would have told EU residents that none needed to make a positive application now but that they should keep a documentary record of their pre-referendum residency in the UK, listing appropriate documents that the government would accept in future should the matter become important, and that they could apply now if they so wished.
Would there be some abuse? Of course. Would it matter? Not really. Britain is not going to be deporting EU citizens except in very unusual circumstances.
To me the Remainers are playing Br'er Rabbit and May's deal is the briar patch.
Meanwhile, much fannying about is not providing an alternative that enough will coalesce around. The Remainer ship circles the Hard Brexit whirlpool, getting ever closer to doom. And yet still that Remainer ship refuses to change course. "Steady as she goes...."
The DUP are also likely to have seen the Northern Ireland polls showing No Deal makes a united Ireland more likely, in some respects therefore a Corbyn style permanent Customs Union plus single market elements on workers' rights for the whole UK is better than the backstop for Northern Ireland alone for the DUP and also poses less of a threat to the Union. Notice too even John McDonnell joking about getting out his orange sash.
Do not rule out therefore PM Corbyn by the middle of next year, propped up by the SNP, the LDs, the DUP, Plaid and the Greens and BINO Brexit in a similar scenario to Spain now where the Socialists are in power without having won a general election and despite having significantly fewer MPs than the main conservatives due to manoueverings of minority parties in parliament
And would the EU agree to such a scenario?
However, Germany is now clearly the dominant power within the EU and the Euro is run in its interest. European history has been dominated since the 1860s by conflicts between Germany and its neighbours, but Germany has now realised that the best way to achieve and maintain its dominance is by a soft approach rather than ruthless aggression, via a multinational front organisation. The EU has been more successful than its German predecessors in its Eastern policies, although reaching its tentacles into the further (non-Ukrainian) parts of the Ukraine seems to be a bridge too far.
I was suspicious of the EU following it's behaviour towards Greece in 2010-1 (and recall a caricature of Merkel in Nazi uniform published then in the Daily Mail). However, I only became hostile to the EU following the violent coup that it fomented in Kiev in February 2014 overthrowing a democratically elected government that wouldn't toe the EU's line. I recall reading articles shortly afterwards by Peter Hitchens, Nigel Farage and Jeremy Corbyn (then a lowly back-bench MP) about this event that convinced me that the EU was a problem from which it would be better if the UK was detached.
However, I can well understand how Remain supporters unreconciled to the vote might feel no obligation to support a deal which they regard as worse than the current terms and which, crucially, does not have the support of a majority of Leavers. Why should they compromise on something that no one actually wants?
If a VoNC leads to a parliament being dissolved on say 27 February with a GE on 4th April (and assuming the WA MV and legislation has not been passed) is there anything that could happen at that point to prevent a No Deal exit?
Presumably TMay stays as PM until the election. But could she:
1. Agree her Deal with the EU? No - because she hasn't got the MV passed.
2. Revoke A50? Almost certainly not but...
The ECJ ruling states the revocation request must be “in accordance with its constitutional requirements and following a democratic process”, but it leaves it for Britain (and presumably British courts) to decide what that process is. I have seen arguments that since the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Act 2017 allowed, rather than prescribed, that "The Prime Minister may notify, under Article 50(2) of the Treaty on European Union, the United Kingdom's intention to withdraw from the EU." it also allows her not to do that.
3. Extend the A50 period? This requires all EU27 members to agree so may be tricky but on balance I think they would agree to it if a GE was underway.
Option 3. seems most likely to me if May remains PM in the run up to the GE (as she surely would), in preference to lapsing into No Deal during a GE campaign.
Captain Corbyn rarely gets above decks. He is present but not involved in its course.....
As Churchill might not have said "May's deal is the worst form of relationship with the EU, except for all the others."
It follows therefore that IYO any type of soft Brexit is a democratic outrage.
Leaving what?
I seem to recall no shortage of posts along those lines ....
Up to a point, this suggests she should vote for May's deal. But there isn't much positive incentive to strengthen May for a Labour MP, since the other half of the equation - a government that does something useful for northern deprived areas - is notably missing.
But don't expect it to be the deal that puts the issue to bed.
Having said that, a part of me would be fascinated to see the Leaver's reaction to the horrors of No Deal and it might be the only way to escape the nostalgia for our glory days and Imperial past.
And that is fine for you. Or me for that matter. I'm a remainer. Big remainer.
But I'm talking about the MPs. The ones who were elected on a promise to Brexit. The ones who made a big deal about respecting the result of the referendum. The ones who voted to trigger article 50 and implement a negotiated exit.
It does not sit well that they now reject the deal because it is not as good as not leaving.
(But yes, I do see the point that if leavers don't like it, why should we pretend to? It's a good point, and I wish it were made more often by the likes of Grieve and Soubry).
Yet wind and tide will force them around May's Ship of State, for fear of the rocks and reefs beyond.
I don't know for certain.
Ah, memories.........
The FTA, yes, of course. But that is all non-binding and aspirational, i.e. up for grabs.
When I talk about 'The Deal', I mean the Withdrawal Treaty.
Trouble is, if we had any influence or power PB would beging to attract the wrong sort rather than all us lovely, politically diverse people!
But just looking at this Withdrawal Treaty. Money, Citizens, IRE Border.
What more could it be offering Remainers?
And since one of the people saying 'Honestly' is Boris Johnson.......,
If Leavers don’t like it, why should Remainers cooperate on this staging post to the shrivelling of the things that make Britain a great place to be? There are answers but they aren’t knockout ones.
I'm very interested in the EU because I've spent half my life on the Continent and reckon that we're all much of a muchness and should be close to a single country. But that's not in the least typical, any more than the ultra-ERGer who feels that being able to negotiate new trade deals represents a dramatic turning point in our history. A shop assistant in Mansfield can be forgiven for thinking we're both nutters and completely irrelevant to her.
Normally, obviously, you'd go for a general election - but with both parties so split this seems an impossibility. In a GE Labour would either have to go full remain or, more likely, for a People's Vote - as Corbyn's 'we'll Brexit but better' stance just won't hold up. Never mind losing voters - the party would fracture before he got to an election. With May gone, the Tories divisions will be more apparent than even now - as lots of MPs reluctantly backing May's deal as making the best of a bad situation will shift into the respective hard Brexit/soft, remain camps.
I also think that kind of mess will diminish the negative elements to a PV. Hardcore Brexiteers will kick up a fuss - but MPs can honestly say to everyone else that they really didn't have any other options that a) tried to respect the notion of people having their say and b) didn't cause immense and irreparable harm to the country politically and economically.
As was noted in last night's thread, things have gotten extremely coarse and combative over the holiday season, from some posters more than others but we are all of us to blame.
The intemperate language and lack of respect for others' opinions shown by some posters has convinced me that there really is no hope. Whether we remain or leave, have another referendum or don't, nothing will be solved.
The country is in an (albeit relatively civil) civil war, and I do not see an end to it.
Javid may be crap on all available evidence, but he's certainly attuned to the dog whistles de jour.
One of May’s greatest weaknesses ( and there are several) is her complete inability to make or grow a consensus or team which supports her positions. She avoids taking a position as long as possible as a means of keeping things together (pissing off many potential supporters in doing so) and then ex cathedra announces the solution, stubbornly refusing to shift. We saw this in the election campaign and in the Brexit negotiations. Alastair complains she has done nothing to bring remainers on board. Most of her leavers have actually gone overboard in frustration and irritation. As I think MD said downthread to piss off both sides in a binary question takes a rare talent.
For all the future gazing that goes on, the only way to find out with any degree of certainty what Leave means is to do it.
If it's palpably bad, we rejoin. And if it isn't, well ok.
Anyway, domestic life calls....
With a packet on his back
And when the ship began to move
The Captain said "quack quack"
I quite like Javid but I thought that his decision not to deploy further ships in the Channel was pretty disgusting. He is basically saying I would rather people drown than us risk more coming on the back of an improved prospect of rescue. It is profoundly immoral.
As does the ridiculous Gavin Williamson.
https://twitter.com/spajw/status/1079349162540441600?s=21
As for the leavers rejecting the deal, I mean the leading lights in that movement, the real freedom fighters, Banks, BoJo, Farage, Mogg, Raab, IDS, Patterson, Davis, Dorries, Jenkyns, those crazy cats.
“Such resilience!”
“How on earth does she keep going?”
“What a bloody amazing woman.”
Hard to understand the gushing praise. I wonder if it is due to gender. Imagine that the PM behaving in this same way in these same circumstances was instead a sturdy looking man of late middle-age, such as Philip Hammond. Would he be as admired? I suspect not.
No, I don't like her at all. One dimensional, rigid, addicted to sterile soundbites.
But in this case, I am rooting for her. The deal is IMO about the best achievable given the imbalance in negotiating power between the UK and the EU, and the need to end FOM but not trash the economy.
I think that TM knows this and it is no surprise that she is fighting tooth & nail, using every trick in the book, to get it through. It would be a dereliction if she wasn't.
US Navy escorts:230
RN escorts: 17
Geography means we aren't that well integrated with the preeminent commonwealth military (Australia) so we rarely exercise with them. Most of the UK-Australian (and NZ to a lesser extent) officer exchange programs have been stopped as the exchangees had a habit doing a lateral transfers into the ADF and not coming back.
Er....