Parliament needs to come to a settled view. That means May needs to remove some of the options from the table, to make things easier. The easiest option to remove from the table is No Deal.
Yes, definitely. No Deal has to go. And remove the 2nd referendum too, since with Labour opposed that has precious little support in the House.
Again, "No Deal" can't "go" unless and until A50 is extended or revoked as it's the default option at the end of A50.
And Parliament can't extend or revoke A50 on its own only the government can do that.
Hasn't Bercow proved that he could do it (or enable the remain majority of MPs to) if he wanted to?
No.
He was quite clear yesterday. Primary legislation is needed to replace primary legislation.
He was also quite clear that the chair can change the rules if the chair wants to.
The chair can only do so much, perhaps you should go on a refresher on how laws are created.
He could in any event only take such extreme action with the backing of a majority of parliament - and if you could really find sufficient MPs who are that determined, you could form a new government for the purpose.
You don't need the Speaker to form a new government without an election.
I realise that - I was pointing out that it might be theoretically possible for Bercow to rewrite Parliamentary procedure entirely, with the support of Parliament, but that it is ridiculous even to contemplate such an idea, as a simple change of government (difficult to contemplate as it is at the moment) would be massively less problematic.
Personally, I've backed Amy Klobuchar to win POTUS 2020 at odds of 33/1 (currently best-priced at around 25/1). For my money she's the feistiest of all the Democratic front runners, a characteristic which should hold her in good stead against Trump.
I thought that her resonse to both Kavanaugh, and Trumps Wall broadcast were very well done. I am on her too, as well as being Green on Kamala.
If Nikki Halley gets the Republican nomination, then her vs Kamala could be an all South Asian match.
Parliament needs to come to a settled view. That means May needs to remove some of the options from the table, to make things easier. The easiest option to remove from the table is No Deal.
Yes, definitely. No Deal has to go. And remove the 2nd referendum too, since with Labour opposed that has precious little support in the House.
Again, "No Deal" can't "go" unless and until A50 is extended or revoked as it's the default option at the end of A50.
And Parliament can't extend or revoke A50 on its own only the government can do that.
Hasn't Bercow proved that he could do it (or enable the remain majority of MPs to) if he wanted to?
No.
He was quite clear yesterday. Primary legislation is needed to replace primary legislation.
He was also quite clear that the chair can change the rules if the chair wants to.
The chair can only do so much, perhaps you should go on a refresher on how laws are created.
Bercow may be a fan of l'etat c,ear moi
I really disliked Speaker Martin, but my loathing of Bercow knows few bounds. Just seeing his picture irritates me. Perfect example of LMS.
As I said earlier, this is another one of those circumstances where I want both sides to lose. Bercow and May have both been contemptible in their handling of Parliament.
Bad news for those (no names, no pack drill) seeking respite from Brexit in concupiscence.
"Super gonorrhea ‘has reached the UK’, doctors warn
‘Super gonorrhea’ hit the headlines after a British tourist contracted a case described as ‘the world’s worst’ in Thailand last year – but the infection has now reached Britain."
Personally, I've backed Amy Klobuchar to win POTUS 2020 at odds of 33/1 (currently best-priced at around 25/1). For my money she's the feistiest of all the Democratic front runners, a characteristic which should hold her in good stead against Trump.
Parliament needs to come to a settled view. That means May needs to remove some of the options from the table, to make things easier. The easiest option to remove from the table is No Deal.
Yes, definitely. No Deal has to go. And remove the 2nd referendum too, since with Labour opposed that has precious little support in the House.
Again, "No Deal" can't "go" unless and until A50 is extended or revoked as it's the default option at the end of A50.
And Parliament can't extend or revoke A50 on its own only the government can do that.
Hasn't Bercow proved that he could do it (or enable the remain majority of MPs to) if he wanted to?
No.
He was quite clear yesterday. Primary legislation is needed to replace primary legislation.
Can anyone other than the Gov't create primary legislation ?
It is possible via a backbench bill, however all the slots for the backbench bills are allocated for this session and cannot be changed.
Is that set by legislation or could the speaker create some new precedent?
No, there's a vote at the start of each Parliamentary session right after the Queen's speech.
The government has to allocate time for these bills, so stop them being talked out like a 10 minute rule bill.
You cannot also change a backbench bill midway through it has to be on same original substance.
You cannot change the 'Ban cyclists who don't wear helmets' bill into the 'Ban pineapple on pizza' bill from when it is was originally selected.
If a bill already on the agenda is amended does that count as primary legislation?
IE if the "Ban cyclists who don't wear helmets' bill is amended into a 'ban cyclists who don't wear helmets and pineapple on pizza' does that count?
The speaker should rule the amendment out of order.
Personally, I've backed Amy Klobuchar to win POTUS 2020 at odds of 33/1 (currently best-priced at around 25/1). For my money she's the feistiest of all the Democratic front runners, a characteristic which should hold her in good stead against Trump.
I thought that her resonse to both Kavanaugh, and Trumps Wall broadcast were very well done. I am on her too, as well as being Green on Kamala.
If Nikki Halley gets the Republican nomination, then her vs Kamala could be an all South Asian match.
Ripe market for a spread bet, come on Sporting Index and put one up!
Seconded. I really hope they do. If they don't, I mean, call themselves a spread betting firm?
They are noticeably less adventurous on politics these days. I remember when you could get markets such as how many days would so & so survive as such & such.
Joe Kennedy is 150.
I know all the arguments about too soon etc . But will he stand aside and watch Beto (only a few years older) run?
Personally, I've backed Amy Klobuchar to win POTUS 2020 at odds of 33/1 (currently best-priced at around 25/1). For my money she's the feistiest of all the Democratic front runners, a characteristic which should hold her in good stead against Trump.
I thought that her resonse to both Kavanaugh, and Trumps Wall broadcast were very well done. I am on her too, as well as being Green on Kamala.
If Nikki Halley gets the Republican nomination, then her vs Kamala could be an all South Asian match.
Nikki Halley looks like the worst bet out there for anything POTUS related. A real wishful thinkers bet.
Parliament needs to come to a settled view. That means May needs to remove some of the options from the table, to make things easier. The easiest option to remove from the table is No Deal.
Yes, definitely. No Deal has to go. And remove the 2nd referendum too, since with Labour opposed that has precious little support in the House.
Again, "No Deal" can't "go" unless and until A50 is extended or revoked as it's the default option at the end of A50.
And Parliament can't extend or revoke A50 on its own only the government can do that.
Hasn't Bercow proved that he could do it (or enable the remain majority of MPs to) if he wanted to?
No.
He was quite clear yesterday. Primary legislation is needed to replace primary legislation.
Can anyone other than the Gov't create primary legislation ?
It is possible via a backbench bill, however all the slots for the backbench bills are allocated for this session and cannot be changed.
Is that set by legislation or could the speaker create some new precedent?
No, there's a vote at the start of each Parliamentary session right after the Queen's speech.
The government has to allocate time for these bills, so stop them being talked out like a 10 minute rule bill.
You cannot also change a backbench bill midway through it has to be on same original substance.
You cannot change the 'Ban cyclists who don't wear helmets' bill into the 'Ban pineapple on pizza' bill from when it is was originally selected.
If a bill already on the agenda is amended does that count as primary legislation?
IE if the "Ban cyclists who don't wear helmets' bill is amended into a 'ban cyclists who don't wear helmets and pineapple on pizza' does that count?
The speaker should rule the amendment out of order.
As should the amendment yesterday.
If Bercow decides its not out of order because Parliament is taking back control and vote down the amendment if they don't like it ... ?
Parliament needs to come to a settled view. That means May needs to remove some of the options from the table, to make things easier. The easiest option to remove from the table is No Deal.
Yes, definitely. No Deal has to go. And remove the 2nd referendum too, since with Labour opposed that has precious little support in the House.
Again, "No Deal" can't "go" unless and until A50 is extended or revoked as it's the default option at the end of A50.
And Parliament can't extend or revoke A50 on its own only the government can do that.
Hasn't Bercow proved that he could do it (or enable the remain majority of MPs to) if he wanted to?
No.
He was quite clear yesterday. Primary legislation is needed to replace primary legislation.
Can anyone other than the Gov't create primary legislation ?
It is possible via a backbench bill, however all the slots for the backbench bills are allocated for this session and cannot be changed.
Is that set by legislation or could the speaker create some new precedent?
No, there's a vote at the start of each Parliamentary session right after the Queen's speech.
The government has to allocate time for these bills, so stop them being talked out like a 10 minute rule bill.
You cannot also change a backbench bill midway through it has to be on same original substance.
You cannot change the 'Ban cyclists who don't wear helmets' bill into the 'Ban pineapple on pizza' bill from when it is was originally selected.
If a bill already on the agenda is amended does that count as primary legislation?
IE if the "Ban cyclists who don't wear helmets' bill is amended into a 'ban cyclists who don't wear helmets and pineapple on pizza' does that count?
The speaker should rule the amendment out of order.
Some people are suggesting enabling the will of the house is the thing which matters, in which case itlogically suggest no amendments could be ruled out of order since it's up the the house to decide whatever it wants. Part of how just as people demonisation the speaker, others go overboard in defence .
Personally, I've backed Amy Klobuchar to win POTUS 2020 at odds of 33/1 (currently best-priced at around 25/1). For my money she's the feistiest of all the Democratic front runners, a characteristic which should hold her in good stead against Trump.
Yes this is my main bet.
I've now taken a nibble. Don't want to miss out on this party.
Japanese PM just said from no 10 that Japan is in full support of the WDA agreed betweenTM and the EU and strongly opposes no deal, as indeed does the whole world
Ripe market for a spread bet, come on Sporting Index and put one up!
Seconded. I really hope they do. If they don't, I mean, call themselves a spread betting firm?
They are noticeably less adventurous on politics these days. I remember when you could get markets such as how many days would so & so survive as such & such.
Indeed. I'm sure you used to be able to get spreads on "Number of cabinet resignations this Parliament" and "Date of next General Election" but they've gone a little boring on politics, possibly as politics itself has got more exciting and less predictable.
Ripe market for a spread bet, come on Sporting Index and put one up!
Seconded. I really hope they do. If they don't, I mean, call themselves a spread betting firm?
They are noticeably less adventurous on politics these days. I remember when you could get markets such as how many days would so & so survive as such & such.
Joe Kennedy is 150.
I know all the arguments about too soon etc . But will he stand aside and watch Beto (only a few years older) run?
O'Rourke is much younger than that. Even Joe Biden is under 100.
Japanese PM just said from no 10 that Japan is in full support of the WDA agreed betweenTM and the EU and strongly opposes no deal, as indeed does the whole world
I'm pretty sure he's not speaking for either Putin or Trump...
Ripe market for a spread bet, come on Sporting Index and put one up!
Seconded. I really hope they do. If they don't, I mean, call themselves a spread betting firm?
They are noticeably less adventurous on politics these days. I remember when you could get markets such as how many days would so & so survive as such & such.
Joe Kennedy is 150.
I know all the arguments about too soon etc . But will he stand aside and watch Beto (only a few years older) run?
He's not made enough noises to run yet. Ocasio-Cortez might be a buzz candidate you could perhaps sell in the low hundreds at some point, maybe. Both need to run for the senate first I think though.
Ripe market for a spread bet, come on Sporting Index and put one up!
Seconded. I really hope they do. If they don't, I mean, call themselves a spread betting firm?
They are noticeably less adventurous on politics these days. I remember when you could get markets such as how many days would so & so survive as such & such.
Joe Kennedy is 150.
I know all the arguments about too soon etc . But will he stand aside and watch Beto (only a few years older) run?
He's not made enough noises to run yet. Ocasio-Cortez might be a buzz candidate you could perhaps sell in the low hundreds at some point, maybe. Both need to run for the senate first I think though.
Ocasio-Cortez is ineligible for 2020, and I think 2024 as well. Too young.
Has anyone yet raised the intervention by the former head of MI6 and former Chief of Defence staff claiming that May's deal will threaten national security and urging a No Deal Brexit?
Apparently though the spooks are hopping mad due to some of the bollocks May deal would have the UK sign up to e.g. Basically paying for access to shared intell, which the UK provides the vast majority of the info to.
As someone said, the more you look into TMay’s deal, the worse it gets. It is dreadful, and we cannot escape it - we will end up simply abrogating, with all the damage that does to our standing.
As a Leaver, I would far rather Remain, than sign this disgraceful suicide note.
Japanese PM just said from no 10 that Japan is in full support of the WDA agreed betweenTM and the EU and strongly opposes no deal, as indeed does the whole world
Too bad the commons might disagree, intentionally or not.
Ripe market for a spread bet, come on Sporting Index and put one up!
Seconded. I really hope they do. If they don't, I mean, call themselves a spread betting firm?
They are noticeably less adventurous on politics these days. I remember when you could get markets such as how many days would so & so survive as such & such.
Joe Kennedy is 150.
I know all the arguments about too soon etc . But will he stand aside and watch Beto (only a few years older) run?
He's not made enough noises to run yet. Ocasio-Cortez might be a buzz candidate you could perhaps sell in the low hundreds at some point, maybe. Both need to run for the senate first I think though.
Ocasio-Cortez is ineligible for 2020, and I think 2024 as well. Too young.
She turns 35 in October 2024, so she'll be a touch under a month old enough by election day 2024.
The new centrist party may be getting its first MP soon.
What new centrist party? Where's the room in the political marketplace for a British equivalent of the FDP, especially with the Liberal Democrats already parked across much of their (rather small) target territory?
Anyone getting a feeling that the ERG is beginning to crack? Bercow's brazen anti-brexit acts might have just woken them up that the S*** just got real...
Ripe market for a spread bet, come on Sporting Index and put one up!
Seconded. I really hope they do. If they don't, I mean, call themselves a spread betting firm?
They are noticeably less adventurous on politics these days. I remember when you could get markets such as how many days would so & so survive as such & such.
Joe Kennedy is 150.
I know all the arguments about too soon etc . But will he stand aside and watch Beto (only a few years older) run?
He's not made enough noises to run yet. Ocasio-Cortez might be a buzz candidate you could perhaps sell in the low hundreds at some point, maybe. Both need to run for the senate first I think though.
Ocasio-Cortez is ineligible for 2020, and I think 2024 as well. Too young.
Raised to 65 isn't it... Biden, Trump, Warren, Sanders...
She is on course for the biggest Commons defeat in Parliamentary history - beating the minority Labour government's losing tally of 166 in 1924.
Looks like it.
MASSIVE Commons rejection of Brexit with a Deal.
And as we know, MASSIVE Commons rejection of Brexit without a Deal.
Put that together, bit of simple algebra, and what do we get?
MASSIVE Commons rejection of Brexit!
That poor old 2016 referendum. So high and mighty, back in the day, so loud and proud, and now with as much status and influence as a eunuch at an orgy.
Anyone getting a feeling that the ERG is beginning to crack? Bercow's brazen anti-brexit acts might have just woken them up that the S*** just got real...
None whatsoever, juding by their pronouncements on Twitter today.
Michael Gove on top form in the Commons, talking about Labour's six Brexit 'tests':
"[Barry Gardiner] summed them up, pithily, in a word which in Spanish translates as ‘cojones’ and in English rhymes with ‘rollocks’. I know, Mr Speaker, there are some distinguished citizens in this country who have put on their cars a poster or sticker saying ‘bollocks to Brexit’ - but we now know from Labour’s own frontbench that their official Brexit position is bollocks.
I have to say that the shadow international trade secretary is a jewel and an ornament to the Labour front bench. He speaks the truth with perfect clarity, and in his description of Labour’s own policy can I say across the House we’re grateful to him, grateful to the constant Gardiner for the way in which he has cast light on the testicular nature of Labour’s position."
Anyone getting a feeling that the ERG is beginning to crack? Bercow's brazen anti-brexit acts might have just woken them up that the S*** just got real...
None whatsoever, juding by their pronouncements on Twitter today.
Catch 22. Even if they are cracking they cannot possibly do so publicly before MV, but that will ensure it is lost by too much to be revived given not all will crack so it needs to look possible.
Ripe market for a spread bet, come on Sporting Index and put one up!
Seconded. I really hope they do. If they don't, I mean, call themselves a spread betting firm?
They are noticeably less adventurous on politics these days. I remember when you could get markets such as how many days would so & so survive as such & such.
Joe Kennedy is 150.
I know all the arguments about too soon etc . But will he stand aside and watch Beto (only a few years older) run?
He's not made enough noises to run yet. Ocasio-Cortez might be a buzz candidate you could perhaps sell in the low hundreds at some point, maybe. Both need to run for the senate first I think though.
Ocasio-Cortez is ineligible for 2020, and I think 2024 as well. Too young.
She turns 35 in October 2024, so she'll be a touch under a month old enough by election day 2024.
Thanks for that. I could never remember if the cutoff was the nomination date, election date or inauguration date.
Born October 1989. 'Ride On Time' was #1 then. I'm starting to feel very old!
Japanese PM just said from no 10 that Japan is in full support of the WDA agreed betweenTM and the EU and strongly opposes no deal, as indeed does the whole world
Too bad the commons might disagree, intentionally or not.
The whole world? Has that been checked out with Trump, Putin, Le Pen?
Japanese PM just said from no 10 that Japan is in full support of the WDA agreed betweenTM and the EU and strongly opposes no deal, as indeed does the whole world
Exactly! Proves that No Deal will be so so bad for the world. Therefore it must be great for us. No collusion. They lose, UK wins. We WIN WIN WIN. No Collusion!
She is on course for the biggest Commons defeat in Parliamentary history - beating the minority Labour government's losing tally of 166 in 1924.
Looks like it.
MASSIVE Commons rejection of Brexit with a Deal.
And as we know, MASSIVE Commons rejection of Brexit without a Deal.
Put that together, bit of simple algebra, and what do we get?
MASSIVE Commons rejection of Brexit!
That poor old 2016 referendum. So high and mighty, back in the day, so loud and proud, and now with as much status and influence as a eunuch at an orgy.
Lesson there somewhere.
Vote the lying Barstewards out?
Some of them may not even be standing again.....(cough....Boles.....)
Michael Gove on top form in the Commons, talking about Labour's six Brexit 'tests':
"[Barry Gardiner] summed them up, pithily, in a word which in Spanish translates as ‘cojones’ and in English rhymes with ‘rollocks’. I know, Mr Speaker, there are some distinguished citizens in this country who have put on their cars a poster or sticker saying ‘bollocks to Brexit’ - but we now know from Labour’s own frontbench that their official Brexit position is bollocks.
I have to say that the shadow international trade secretary is a jewel and an ornament to the Labour front bench. He speaks the truth with perfect clarity, and in his description of Labour’s own policy can I say across the House we’re grateful to him, grateful to the constant Gardiner for the way in which he has cast light on the testicular nature of Labour’s position."
That works out a majority for No of around ~150, but I think it'll be a little worse than that.
The wobblers were previously confirmed against, otherwise how can they have changed their mind?
What I mean is the 114 or so on Buzzfeed's list haven't been reconfirmed.
The ones on ConHome's list of 71 have either been reconfirmed or are considered an absolute certainty to vote No.
Not sure there's much practical distinction between 70 Tories (+10 DUP) voting No and 110+10, because either number is far too large to make the idea of asking Parliament to vote again a practical plan B.
Parliament needs to come to a settled view. That means May needs to remove some of the options from the table, to make things easier. The easiest option to remove from the table is No Deal.
Yes, definitely. No Deal has to go. And remove the 2nd referendum too, since with Labour opposed that has precious little support in the House.
Again, "No Deal" can't "go" unless and until A50 is extended or revoked as it's the default option at the end of A50.
And Parliament can't extend or revoke A50 on its own only the government can do that.
Hasn't Bercow proved that he could do it (or enable the remain majority of MPs to) if he wanted to?
No.
He was quite clear yesterday. Primary legislation is needed to replace primary legislation.
Can anyone other than the Gov't create primary legislation ?
Yes, a back bench bill is primary legislation. It simply means an Act of Parliament rather than a statutory instrument authorised by an Act. Of course there is the small matter of getting time for such a bill but no doubt Bercow could help.
That works out a majority for No of around ~150, but I think it'll be a little worse than that.
The wobblers were previously confirmed against, otherwise how can they have changed their mind?
What I mean is the 114 or so on Buzzfeed's list haven't been reconfirmed.
The ones on ConHome's list of 71 have either been reconfirmed or are considered an absolute certainty to vote No.
Not sure there's much practical distinction between 70 Tories (+10 DUP) voting No and 110+10, because either number is far too large to make the idea of asking Parliament to vote again a practical plan B.
I suppose it's always the weakest-willed which are the first to switch.
In addition to the 71 nailed on to vote No, these are the wobblers to watch, according to ConHome: (* means already wobbled) Might wobble to Yes John Baron Guto Bebb David Evennett Michael Fallon *George Freeman Justine Greening Rob Halfon *Trudy Harrison Sir John Hayes Gordon Henderson Pauline Latham *Sir Edward Leigh Sir Greg Knight Anne Main Scott Mann Stephen McPartland Nigel Mills Damien Moore Matthew Offord Neil Parish Sir Mike Penning Royston Smith Anna Soubry Bob Stewart Sir Robert Syms Derek Thomas Craig Tracey Giles Watling John Whittingdale Sarah Wollaston William Wragg
Might wobble to No Robert Courts Charlie Elphicke Alister Jack John Lamont Phillip Lee Stephen Metcalfe Grant Shapps Hugo Swire Mike Wood
They want him deselected as their candidate. It does not affect his current status as an MP until the next election. And according to the most recent YouGov poll in the constituency support for Brexit has actually gone up rather than down since the referendum.
Personally I am on the same page as Boles when it comes to the preferred form of Brexit but that is apparently not a view shared by his constituents.
Boles, of course, merely has to let it be known he will happily stand as an Independent and split the Tory vote, if that is the outcome they desire.
He'll take a couple of thousand votes at the most. No chance that seat doesn't go to anyone other than the official Tory candidate.
Some MPs have received substantial votes when standing against their former parties. Dave Nellist came close to holding his Coventry seat in 1992 and Dick Taverne managed to narrowly hold Lincoln in February 1974. Further back Desmond Donnelly polled nearly 12,000 votes in Pembroke in 1970 - and S.O. Davies retained Merthyr Tydfil in the same year!
That works out a majority for No of around ~150, but I think it'll be a little worse than that.
The wobblers were previously confirmed against, otherwise how can they have changed their mind?
What I mean is the 114 or so on Buzzfeed's list haven't been reconfirmed.
The ones on ConHome's list of 71 have either been reconfirmed or are considered an absolute certainty to vote No.
Not sure there's much practical distinction between 70 Tories (+10 DUP) voting No and 110+10, because either number is far too large to make the idea of asking Parliament to vote again a practical plan B.
I've been keeping a similar list, taking a still more restrictive view. Without major changes I can't see the rebellion on the Brexit end going below 50 and 60 looks more likely as a minimum.
Parliament needs to come to a settled view. That means May needs to remove some of the options from the table, to make things easier. The easiest option to remove from the table is No Deal.
Yes, definitely. No Deal has to go. And remove the 2nd referendum too, since with Labour opposed that has precious little support in the House.
Again, "No Deal" can't "go" unless and until A50 is extended or revoked as it's the default option at the end of A50.
And Parliament can't extend or revoke A50 on its own only the government can do that.
The EU will not extend A50 other than for a general election or second referendum.
That works out a majority for No of around ~150, but I think it'll be a little worse than that.
The wobblers were previously confirmed against, otherwise how can they have changed their mind?
What I mean is the 114 or so on Buzzfeed's list haven't been reconfirmed.
The ones on ConHome's list of 71 have either been reconfirmed or are considered an absolute certainty to vote No.
Not sure there's much practical distinction between 70 Tories (+10 DUP) voting No and 110+10, because either number is far too large to make the idea of asking Parliament to vote again a practical plan B.
I suppose it's always the weakest-willed which are the first to switch.
Alternatively there may be a positive correlation between changing your mind on this and connection with the real world. For some, I fear, the real world is barely a distant glimmer in the night sky.
Parliament needs to come to a settled view. That means May needs to remove some of the options from the table, to make things easier. The easiest option to remove from the table is No Deal.
Yes, definitely. No Deal has to go. And remove the 2nd referendum too, since with Labour opposed that has precious little support in the House.
Again, "No Deal" can't "go" unless and until A50 is extended or revoked as it's the default option at the end of A50.
And Parliament can't extend or revoke A50 on its own only the government can do that.
The EU will not extend A50 other than for a general election or second referendum.
I'm not sure that's true.
They would, I'm sure, grant a technical extension to ensure the smooth implementation of the WA, but only if the UK has actually concluded it.
Parliament needs to come to a settled view. That means May needs to remove some of the options from the table, to make things easier. The easiest option to remove from the table is No Deal.
Yes, definitely. No Deal has to go. And remove the 2nd referendum too, since with Labour opposed that has precious little support in the House.
Again, "No Deal" can't "go" unless and until A50 is extended or revoked as it's the default option at the end of A50.
And Parliament can't extend or revoke A50 on its own only the government can do that.
The EU will not extend A50 other than for a general election or second referendum.
I'm not sure that's true.
It is what they have said and generally they have stuck to their guns during these negotiations.
What the PM really needs is the DUP. If they shift, a lot of Tory rebels would follow. However, there doesn't seem to be any sign of such a shift at the moment.
In addition to the 71 nailed on to vote No, these are the wobblers to watch, according to ConHome: (* means already wobbled) Might wobble to Yes John Baron Guto Bebb David Evennett Michael Fallon *George Freeman Justine Greening Rob Halfon *Trudy Harrison Sir John Hayes Gordon Henderson Pauline Latham *Sir Edward Leigh Sir Greg Knight Anne Main Scott Mann Stephen McPartland Nigel Mills Damien Moore Matthew Offord Neil Parish Sir Mike Penning Royston Smith Anna Soubry Bob Stewart Sir Robert Syms Derek Thomas Craig Tracey Giles Watling John Whittingdale Sarah Wollaston William Wragg
Might wobble to No Robert Courts Charlie Elphicke Alister Jack John Lamont Phillip Lee Stephen Metcalfe Grant Shapps Hugo Swire Mike Wood
That list is definitely out of date. Most of those in the "might wobble to No" have already said they will vote no, eg:
That works out a majority for No of around ~150, but I think it'll be a little worse than that.
The wobblers were previously confirmed against, otherwise how can they have changed their mind?
What I mean is the 114 or so on Buzzfeed's list haven't been reconfirmed.
The ones on ConHome's list of 71 have either been reconfirmed or are considered an absolute certainty to vote No.
Not sure there's much practical distinction between 70 Tories (+10 DUP) voting No and 110+10, because either number is far too large to make the idea of asking Parliament to vote again a practical plan B.
I've been keeping a similar list, taking a still more restrictive view. Without major changes I can't see the rebellion on the Brexit end going below 50 and 60 looks more likely as a minimum.
If the Deal is voted down by a large enough margin to make it completely unrecoverable then might May simply throw in the towel and resign? Her stubbornness and talent for survival are both oft remarked upon, but she's invested everything in this agreement.
What the PM really needs is the DUP. If they shift, a lot of Tory rebels would follow. However, there doesn't seem to be any sign of such a shift at the moment.
You know, May's failure to keep the DUP on board throughout this process is the single most baffling part of her behaviour to me.
* You rely on them for a functional majority * They're good friends and allies with your fractious Brexiteer wing * They're legendarily stubborn * Betrayal narratives are their bread and butter
If there's one group you want inside the tent pissing out, it's them.
Anne Perkins was quite tough on Bercow in the Guardian whereas over at the FT Bercow appears to be the knight in shining armour. If it is the case that Bercow over-ruled his advice ought he not to give us an explanation?
That works out a majority for No of around ~150, but I think it'll be a little worse than that.
The wobblers were previously confirmed against, otherwise how can they have changed their mind?
What I mean is the 114 or so on Buzzfeed's list haven't been reconfirmed.
The ones on ConHome's list of 71 have either been reconfirmed or are considered an absolute certainty to vote No.
Not sure there's much practical distinction between 70 Tories (+10 DUP) voting No and 110+10, because either number is far too large to make the idea of asking Parliament to vote again a practical plan B.
I've been keeping a similar list, taking a still more restrictive view. Without major changes I can't see the rebellion on the Brexit end going below 50 and 60 looks more likely as a minimum.
If the Deal is voted down by a large enough margin to make it completely unrecoverable then might May simply throw in the towel and resign? Her stubbornness and talent for survival are both oft remarked upon, but she's invested everything in this agreement.
I thought she'd announce her resignation if she lost heavily in December. Nothing has changed.
Parliament needs to come to a settled view. That means May needs to remove some of the options from the table, to make things easier. The easiest option to remove from the table is No Deal.
Yes, definitely. No Deal has to go. And remove the 2nd referendum too, since with Labour opposed that has precious little support in the House.
Again, "No Deal" can't "go" unless and until A50 is extended or revoked as it's the default option at the end of A50.
And Parliament can't extend or revoke A50 on its own only the government can do that.
The EU will not extend A50 other than for a general election or second referendum.
I'm not sure that's true.
I am not sure even if those contingencies are true. It just takes one to say no.
That works out a majority for No of around ~150, but I think it'll be a little worse than that.
The wobblers were previously confirmed against, otherwise how can they have changed their mind?
What I mean is the 114 or so on Buzzfeed's list haven't been reconfirmed.
The ones on ConHome's list of 71 have either been reconfirmed or are considered an absolute certainty to vote No.
Not sure there's much practical distinction between 70 Tories (+10 DUP) voting No and 110+10, because either number is far too large to make the idea of asking Parliament to vote again a practical plan B.
I've been keeping a similar list, taking a still more restrictive view. Without major changes I can't see the rebellion on the Brexit end going below 50 and 60 looks more likely as a minimum.
If the Deal is voted down by a large enough margin to make it completely unrecoverable then might May simply throw in the towel and resign? Her stubbornness and talent for survival are both oft remarked upon, but she's invested everything in this agreement.
I thought she'd announce her resignation if she lost heavily in December. Nothing has changed.
Very true. I suppose if she just digs her heels in and refuses to offer any alternative then the clock simply continues to run down until MPs either relent or vote her out.
So, ball back in court of Tory pro-EU types. Perhaps.
I'm glad that nobody else appears to have a clue about how this is all going to pan out.
That works out a majority for No of around ~150, but I think it'll be a little worse than that.
The wobblers were previously confirmed against, otherwise how can they have changed their mind?
What I mean is the 114 or so on Buzzfeed's list haven't been reconfirmed.
The ones on ConHome's list of 71 have either been reconfirmed or are considered an absolute certainty to vote No.
Not sure there's much practical distinction between 70 Tories (+10 DUP) voting No and 110+10, because either number is far too large to make the idea of asking Parliament to vote again a practical plan B.
I've been keeping a similar list, taking a still more restrictive view. Without major changes I can't see the rebellion on the Brexit end going below 50 and 60 looks more likely as a minimum.
If the Deal is voted down by a large enough margin to make it completely unrecoverable then might May simply throw in the towel and resign? Her stubbornness and talent for survival are both oft remarked upon, but she's invested everything in this agreement.
She really should. Her resignation would be a necessary if not sufficient condition of the deal re-emerging at some point.
In addition to the 71 nailed on to vote No, these are the wobblers to watch, according to ConHome: (* means already wobbled) Might wobble to Yes John Baron Guto Bebb David Evennett Michael Fallon *George Freeman Justine Greening Rob Halfon *Trudy Harrison Sir John Hayes Gordon Henderson Pauline Latham *Sir Edward Leigh Sir Greg Knight Anne Main Scott Mann Stephen McPartland Nigel Mills Damien Moore Matthew Offord Neil Parish Sir Mike Penning Royston Smith Anna Soubry Bob Stewart Sir Robert Syms Derek Thomas Craig Tracey Giles Watling John Whittingdale Sarah Wollaston William Wragg
Might wobble to No Robert Courts Charlie Elphicke Alister Jack John Lamont Phillip Lee Stephen Metcalfe Grant Shapps Hugo Swire Mike Wood
That list is definitely out of date. Most of those in the "might wobble to No" have already said they will vote no, eg:
Yes, a back bench bill is primary legislation. It simply means an Act of Parliament rather than a statutory instrument authorised by an Act. Of course there is the small matter of getting time for such a bill but no doubt Bercow could help.
I like it. A private member's bill to revoke article 50 and remain in the European Union. A tie! Passes with Bercow's casting vote. We remain and he leaves - into Witness Protection.
Oh yes.
A world class drama such as this one deserves an ending that lives up to what has gone before.
One day the cult will wake up and think what the bloody hell were we thinking...he ain't the messiah, he hasn't even got a vague idea about us youngsters.
They might also wonder why they spent the size of Venezuela's national debt on Fortnite skins and dances.
What the PM really needs is the DUP. If they shift, a lot of Tory rebels would follow. However, there doesn't seem to be any sign of such a shift at the moment.
You know, May's failure to keep the DUP on board throughout this process is the single most baffling part of her behaviour to me.
* You rely on them for a functional majority * They're good friends and allies with your fractious Brexiteer wing * They're legendarily stubborn * Betrayal narratives are their bread and butter
If there's one group you want inside the tent pissing out, it's them.
What the PM really needs is the DUP. If they shift, a lot of Tory rebels would follow. However, there doesn't seem to be any sign of such a shift at the moment.
You know, May's failure to keep the DUP on board throughout this process is the single most baffling part of her behaviour to me.
* You rely on them for a functional majority * They're good friends and allies with your fractious Brexiteer wing * They're legendarily stubborn * Betrayal narratives are their bread and butter
If there's one group you want inside the tent pissing out, it's them.
Well quite. The story of this when it finally comes out is going to read like a new Laurel and Hardy script.
Yes, a back bench bill is primary legislation. It simply means an Act of Parliament rather than a statutory instrument authorised by an Act. Of course there is the small matter of getting time for such a bill but no doubt Bercow could help.
I like it. A private member's bill to revoke article 50 and remain in the European Union. A tie! Passes with Bercow's casting vote. We remain and he leaves - into Witness Protection.
Oh yes.
A world class drama such as this one deserves an ending that lives up to what has gone before.
What the PM really needs is the DUP. If they shift, a lot of Tory rebels would follow. However, there doesn't seem to be any sign of such a shift at the moment.
Yes I have been pondering that. Not sure what exactly would do it. Not another bung. A post in government? Too extreme a move?
What the PM really needs is the DUP. If they shift, a lot of Tory rebels would follow. However, there doesn't seem to be any sign of such a shift at the moment.
You know, May's failure to keep the DUP on board throughout this process is the single most baffling part of her behaviour to me.
* You rely on them for a functional majority * They're good friends and allies with your fractious Brexiteer wing * They're legendarily stubborn * Betrayal narratives are their bread and butter
If there's one group you want inside the tent pissing out, it's them.
Well quite. The story of this when it finally comes out is going to read like a new Laurel and Hardy script.
I fear that Tim Shipman's "trilogy" will end up a bit like Douglas Adams's.
Though he must be secretly hoping it'll all fall through so the next book can be called "Not Out".
What the PM really needs is the DUP. If they shift, a lot of Tory rebels would follow. However, there doesn't seem to be any sign of such a shift at the moment.
You know, May's failure to keep the DUP on board throughout this process is the single most baffling part of her behaviour to me.
* You rely on them for a functional majority * They're good friends and allies with your fractious Brexiteer wing * They're legendarily stubborn * Betrayal narratives are their bread and butter
If there's one group you want inside the tent pissing out, it's them.
Yes, it is baffling.
No more baffling than her inability to work with any other interested group from the opposition (any of them), to the ERG, to remainers in her own party, to pretty much everyone in her cabinet as constituted from time to time. She is an earnest, diligent, honest person driven by her perception of the national interest but I honestly cannot recall a more incompetent politician as PM in my lifetime. Its spectacular in its awfulness.
What the PM really needs is the DUP. If they shift, a lot of Tory rebels would follow. However, there doesn't seem to be any sign of such a shift at the moment.
Yes I have been pondering that. Not sure what exactly would do it. Not another bung. A post in government? Too extreme a move?
The DUP wanted Brexit to cleave NI away from the EU and Ireland and align it more closely with rUK. What the backstop does, and by extension, any future trading arrangement that can replace it, is almost exactly the opposite.
Honestly I think the DUP made a massive miscalculation supporting Brexit, are aware of it, but are happy to let May be the fall guy.
Comments
If Nikki Halley gets the Republican nomination, then her vs Kamala could be an all South Asian match.
It has to be the same substantive bill.
A bit more changes are allowed because the backbench bill isn't drafted by law officers/ministers/civil servants at the start.
I know all the arguments about too soon etc . But will he stand aside and watch Beto (only a few years older) run?
If Bercow decides its not out of order because Parliament is taking back control and vote down the amendment if they don't like it ... ?
https://twitter.com/JonathanEley/status/1083405694404120578
Even Joe Biden is under 100.
Apart from the Tory party membership that is.
Both need to run for the senate first I think though.
Just a hunch.
Born October 1989. 'Ride On Time' was #1 then. I'm starting to feel very old!
https://www.conservativehome.com/parliament/2019/01/our-estimate-of-how-many-conservative-mps-oppose-the-brexit-deal-not-100-but-64.html
That works out a majority for No of around ~150, but I think it'll be a little worse than that.
Hence why imo Corbyn's position is perfectly reasonable.
If this parliament is not fit for purpose, we need another one. How do we get that? A general election.
If he gets one and he wins it, he can have a bash at Brexit.
He's basically pretending there isn't a decision to be made.... all that it needed is for Jeremy to bring everyone together.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aNXuWK6-U-U
Maybe they can't decide if the meaningful vote is important or not.
The ones on ConHome's list of 71 have either been reconfirmed or are considered an absolute certainty to vote No.
Not sure there's much practical distinction between 70 Tories (+10 DUP) voting No and 110+10, because either number is far too large to make the idea of asking Parliament to vote again a practical plan B.
Might wobble to Yes
John Baron
Guto Bebb
David Evennett
Michael Fallon
*George FreemanJustine Greening
Rob Halfon
*Trudy HarrisonSir John Hayes
Gordon Henderson
Pauline Latham
*Sir Edward LeighSir Greg Knight
Anne Main
Scott Mann
Stephen McPartland
Nigel Mills
Damien Moore
Matthew Offord
Neil Parish
Sir Mike Penning
Royston Smith
Anna Soubry
Bob Stewart
Sir Robert Syms
Derek Thomas
Craig Tracey
Giles Watling
John Whittingdale
Sarah Wollaston
William Wragg
Might wobble to No
Robert Courts
Charlie Elphicke
Alister Jack
John Lamont
Phillip Lee
Stephen Metcalfe
Grant Shapps
Hugo Swire
Mike Wood
https://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/17307670.witney-mp-robert-courts-writes-open-letter-on-the-brexit-process/
https://www.stourbridgenews.co.uk/news/blackcountry/17292645.dudley-south-mp-mike-wood-supports-theresa-may-as-prime-minister-faces-no-confidence-vote/
* You rely on them for a functional majority
* They're good friends and allies with your fractious Brexiteer wing
* They're legendarily stubborn
* Betrayal narratives are their bread and butter
If there's one group you want inside the tent pissing out, it's them.
https://www.ft.com/content/c47e7ee4-14e6-11e9-a581-4ff78404524e
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jan/09/john-bercow-decision-endangers-the-office-of-speaker-and-our-democracy
https://twitter.com/henrymance/status/1083413406865076227
So, ball back in court of Tory pro-EU types. Perhaps.
I'm glad that nobody else appears to have a clue about how this is all going to pan out.
Oh yes.
A world class drama such as this one deserves an ending that lives up to what has gone before.
They might also wonder why they spent the size of Venezuela's national debt on Fortnite skins and dances.
Though he must be secretly hoping it'll all fall through so the next book can be called "Not Out".
Honestly I think the DUP made a massive miscalculation supporting Brexit, are aware of it, but are happy to let May be the fall guy.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6577765/David-Cameron-Costa-Rica-Theresa-Mays-Government-sent-Brexit-meltdown.html
https://twitter.com/JonnElledge/status/1083393660501282817