Forgive my cynicism but all this talk of A50 being extended is very conveniently timed re Tuesday's vote. It smacks of the Tory whips to panic Brexiter deal refusniks that there will be no Brexit at all.
If the deal is not agreed it is very likely there won’t be a Brexit.
In the event of her deal being defeated, I think Mrs May will throw in the towel and say it is up to parliament to decide and enable, as government, whatever the majority of MPs decide. I think there would be a large majority supporting her deal or remain and could agree to her Deal subject to a Deal/Remain referendum. The EU would agree to an extension for that.
Ah, the old EU gambit. Keep them voting until you get the right answer.
Isn't the essence of democracy that people have the right to keep voting until they find the right answer?
Forgive my cynicism but all this talk of A50 being extended is very conveniently timed re Tuesday's vote. It smacks of the Tory whips to panic Brexiter deal refusniks that there will be no Brexit at all.
If the deal is not agreed it is very likely there won’t be a Brexit.
In the event of her deal being defeated, I think Mrs May will throw in the towel and say it is up to parliament to decide and enable, as government, whatever the majority of MPs decide. I think there would be a large majority supporting her deal or remain and could agree to her Deal subject to a Deal/Remain referendum. The EU would agree to an extension for that.
Ah, the old EU gambit. Keep them voting until you get the right answer.
Isn't the essence of democracy that people have the right to keep voting until they find the right answer?
Usually whoever wins gets a chance to implement their manifesto.
Forgive my cynicism but all this talk of A50 being extended is very conveniently timed re Tuesday's vote. It smacks of the Tory whips to panic Brexiter deal refusniks that there will be no Brexit at all.
If the deal is not agreed it is very likely there won’t be a Brexit.
In the event of her deal being defeated, I think Mrs May will throw in the towel and say it is up to parliament to decide and enable, as government, whatever the majority of MPs decide. I think there would be a large majority supporting her deal or remain and could agree to her Deal subject to a Deal/Remain referendum. The EU would agree to an extension for that.
Ah, the old EU gambit. Keep them voting until you get the right answer.
It's not the EU that is keeping them voting. It is our sovereign parliament that has taken control and will enable the British people to decide by referendum - not the EU. It is quite bizarre to blame the EU or to claim it is not democratic.
Forgive my cynicism but all this talk of A50 being extended is very conveniently timed re Tuesday's vote. It smacks of the Tory whips to panic Brexiter deal refusniks that there will be no Brexit at all.
If the deal is not agreed it is very likely there won’t be a Brexit.
In the event of her deal being defeated, I think Mrs May will throw in the towel and say it is up to parliament to decide and enable, as government, whatever the majority of MPs decide. I think there would be a large majority supporting her deal or remain and could agree to her Deal subject to a Deal/Remain referendum. The EU would agree to an extension for that.
Ah, the old EU gambit. Keep them voting until you get the right answer.
Isn't the essence of democracy that people have the right to keep voting until they find the right answer?
Nope. The essence of democracy is the people decide what the right answer is and then the politicians act on that.
Forgive my cynicism but all this talk of A50 being extended is very conveniently timed re Tuesday's vote. It smacks of the Tory whips to panic Brexiter deal refusniks that there will be no Brexit at all.
If the deal is not agreed it is very likely there won’t be a Brexit.
In the event of her deal being defeated, I think Mrs May will throw in the towel and say it is up to parliament to decide and enable, as government, whatever the majority of MPs decide. I think there would be a large majority supporting her deal or remain and could agree to her Deal subject to a Deal/Remain referendum. The EU would agree to an extension for that.
Ah, the old EU gambit. Keep them voting until you get the right answer.
It's not the EU that is keeping them voting. It is our sovereign parliament that has taken control and will enable the British people to decide by referendum - not the EU. It is quite bizarre to blame the EU or to claim it is not democratic.
Who knows what the EU’s thought process was with their total lack of flexibility on the backstop. And as for not being democratic, I think that’s quite obvious in the relative influence of the commission vs the parliament.
There's plenty that points toward May having promised Nissan et al that there won't be a no deal exit. The rest is supposition, for sure. But, knowing how government works, I am pretty confident a Bill is already drafted, even if only by a senior civil servant who hasn't yet been asked to do so, but has it ready locked in his drawer.
My instinct is that May is a rare politician who will try harder than most to keep her promises.
It is all supposition. You have no basis in fact for any of it. And it is clear it is mostly informed by your own personal preference.
Dr. Foxy, an astute point, but the Ratner comparison is not for the UK within the EU but the UK's pro-EU political class within this country.
Teach the electorate their views can be ignored and they'll split between apathy, voting for one mainstream party just because they loathe the other, or going for new (perhaps more extreme) parties.
Forgive my cynicism but all this talk of A50 being extended is very conveniently timed re Tuesday's vote. It smacks of the Tory whips to panic Brexiter deal refusniks that there will be no Brexit at all.
If the deal is not agreed it is very likely there won’t be a Brexit.
In the event of her deal being defeated, I think Mrs May will throw in the towel and say it is up to parliament to decide and enable, as government, whatever the majority of MPs decide. I think there would be a large majority supporting her deal or remain and could agree to her Deal subject to a Deal/Remain referendum. The EU would agree to an extension for that.
Ah, the old EU gambit. Keep them voting until you get the right answer.
Isn't the essence of democracy that people have the right to keep voting until they find the right answer?
Nope. The essence of democracy is the people decide what the right answer is and then the politicians act on that.
Now that we have potential answers on offer, the sooner that is done, the better.
Forgive my cynicism but all this talk of A50 being extended is very conveniently timed re Tuesday's vote. It smacks of the Tory whips to panic Brexiter deal refusniks that there will be no Brexit at all.
If the deal is not agreed it is very likely there won’t be a Brexit.
In the event of her deal being defeated, I think Mrs May will throw in the towel and say it is up to parliament to decide and enable, as government, whatever the majority of MPs decide. I think there would be a large majority supporting her deal or remain and could agree to her Deal subject to a Deal/Remain referendum. The EU would agree to an extension for that.
Ah, the old EU gambit. Keep them voting until you get the right answer.
Isn't the essence of democracy that people have the right to keep voting until they find the right answer?
Nope. The essence of democracy is the people decide what the right answer is and then the politicians act on that.
Nope. The essence of OUR democracy is that people decide on who will represent them, and those people (MPs) decide what is in the interests of the people.
But this is boring isn't it? Let's just agree to disagree.
Forgive my cynicism but all this talk of A50 being extended is very conveniently timed re Tuesday's vote. It smacks of the Tory whips to panic Brexiter deal refusniks that there will be no Brexit at all.
If the deal is not agreed it is very likely there won’t be a Brexit.
In the event of her deal being defeated, I think Mrs May will throw in the towel and say it is up to parliament to decide and enable, as government, whatever the majority of MPs decide. I think there would be a large majority supporting her deal or remain and could agree to her Deal subject to a Deal/Remain referendum. The EU would agree to an extension for that.
Ah, the old EU gambit. Keep them voting until you get the right answer.
Isn't the essence of democracy that people have the right to keep voting until they find the right answer?
Nope. The essence of democracy is the people decide what the right answer is and then the politicians act on that.
Now that we have potential answers on offer, the sooner that is done, the better.
The potential answers being ratifying this agreement or not. The decision to leave has already been made.
Forgive my cynicism but all this talk of A50 being extended is very conveniently timed re Tuesday's vote. It smacks of the Tory whips to panic Brexiter deal refusniks that there will be no Brexit at all.
If the deal is not agreed it is very likely there won’t be a Brexit.
In the event of her deal being defeated, I think Mrs May will throw in the towel and say it is up to parliament to decide and enable, as government, whatever the majority of MPs decide. I think there would be a large majority supporting her deal or remain and could agree to her Deal subject to a Deal/Remain referendum. The EU would agree to an extension for that.
Ah, the old EU gambit. Keep them voting until you get the right answer.
It's not the EU that is keeping them voting. It is our sovereign parliament that has taken control and will enable the British people to decide by referendum - not the EU. It is quite bizarre to blame the EU or to claim it is not democratic.
Who knows what the EU’s thought process was with their total lack of flexibility on the backstop. And as for not being democratic, I think that’s quite obvious in the relative influence of the commission vs the parliament.
Forgive my cynicism but all this talk of A50 being extended is very conveniently timed re Tuesday's vote. It smacks of the Tory whips to panic Brexiter deal refusniks that there will be no Brexit at all.
If the deal is not agreed it is very likely there won’t be a Brexit.
In the event of her deal being defeated, I think Mrs May will throw in the towel and say it is up to parliament to decide and enable, as government, whatever the majority of MPs decide. I think there would be a large majority supporting her deal or remain and could agree to her Deal subject to a Deal/Remain referendum. The EU would agree to an extension for that.
Ah, the old EU gambit. Keep them voting until you get the right answer.
I don't think we can justifiably pin this one on Brussels. If there is a second referendum, it'll be the work of Parliament and Parliament alone.
Forgive my cynicism but all this talk of A50 being extended is very conveniently timed re Tuesday's vote. It smacks of the Tory whips to panic Brexiter deal refusniks that there will be no Brexit at all.
If the deal is not agreed it is very likely there won’t be a Brexit.
In the event of her deal being defeated, I think Mrs May will throw in the towel and say it is up to parliament to decide and enable, as government, whatever the majority of MPs decide. I think there would be a large majority supporting her deal or remain and could agree to her Deal subject to a Deal/Remain referendum. The EU would agree to an extension for that.
Ah, the old EU gambit. Keep them voting until you get the right answer.
It's not the EU that is keeping them voting. It is our sovereign parliament that has taken control and will enable the British people to decide by referendum - not the EU. It is quite bizarre to blame the EU or to claim it is not democratic.
Who knows what the EU’s thought process was with their total lack of flexibility on the backstop. And as for not being democratic, I think that’s quite obvious in the relative influence of the commission vs the parliament.
The parliament can overrule the commission.
It can? How frequently does it do this. I was more talking about legislative initiative, which is entirely in the court of the commission.
On topic, any delay will show that Brexit is a movable body. It would also cripple the confidence of many Leavers. Everything would feel much more contingent.
In other words, I agree with OGH and it would be a very big moment.
There's plenty that points toward May having promised Nissan et al that there won't be a no deal exit. The rest is supposition, for sure. But, knowing how government works, I am pretty confident a Bill is already drafted, even if only by a senior civil servant who hasn't yet been asked to do so, but has it ready locked in his drawer.
My instinct is that May is a rare politician who will try harder than most to keep her promises.
Who knows what May promised Nissan or other industry leaders.
Nissan, and Mrs May, for a start.
The only reassurances that could have been offered are either no exit without a deal, or significant government support for industry in the event of such an exit. Since the latter would be a potential blank cheque that would cripple the country and flout Tory principles, it inevitably directs back to the former.
Forgive my cynicism but all this talk of A50 being extended is very conveniently timed re Tuesday's vote. It smacks of the Tory whips to panic Brexiter deal refusniks that there will be no Brexit at all.
If the deal is not agreed it is very likely there won’t be a Brexit.
In the event of her deal being defeated, I think Mrs May will throw in the towel and say it is up to parliament to decide and enable, as government, whatever the majority of MPs decide. I think there would be a large majority supporting her deal or remain and could agree to her Deal subject to a Deal/Remain referendum. The EU would agree to an extension for that.
Ah, the old EU gambit. Keep them voting until you get the right answer.
I don't think we can justifiably pin this one on Brussels. If there is a second referendum, it'll be the work of Parliament and Parliament alone.
I know, it’s shocking that remainers are stooping to the EU’s level.
There's plenty that points toward May having promised Nissan et al that there won't be a no deal exit. The rest is supposition, for sure. But, knowing how government works, I am pretty confident a Bill is already drafted, even if only by a senior civil servant who hasn't yet been asked to do so, but has it ready locked in his drawer.
My instinct is that May is a rare politician who will try harder than most to keep her promises.
Who knows what May promised Nissan or other industry leaders.
Nissan, and Mrs May, for a start.
The only reassurances that could have been offered are either no exit without a deal, or significant government support for industry in the event of such an exit. Since the latter would be a potential blank cheque that would cripple the country and flout Tory principles, it inevitably directs back to the former.
On topic, any delay will show that Brexit is a movable body. It would also cripple the confidence of many Leavers. Everything would feel much more contingent.
In other words, I agree with OGH and it would be a very big moment.
In would also completely neuter the project fear about civil unrest after revocation. Either the extension will happen without disorder, and the bluff will have been called, or there will be disorder, and we'll then be in a position were anything other than a subsequent revocation will be seen as caving in to the mob.
Forgive my cynicism but all this talk of A50 being extended is very conveniently timed re Tuesday's vote. It smacks of the Tory whips to panic Brexiter deal refusniks that there will be no Brexit at all.
If the deal is not agreed it is very likely there won’t be a Brexit.
In the event of her deal being defeated, I think Mrs May will throw in the towel and say it is up to parliament to decide and enable, as government, whatever the majority of MPs decide. I think there would be a large majority supporting her deal or remain and could agree to her Deal subject to a Deal/Remain referendum. The EU would agree to an extension for that.
Ah, the old EU gambit. Keep them voting until you get the right answer.
Isn't the essence of democracy that people have the right to keep voting until they find the right answer?
Nope. The essence of democracy is the people decide what the right answer is and then the politicians act on that.
Nope. The essence of OUR democracy is that people decide on who will represent them, and those people (MPs) decide what is in the interests of the people.
But this is boring isn't it? Let's just agree to disagree.
That, however, is at the root of all our problems: representative democracy and direct democracy don't make for easy bedfellows.
If Parliament hadn't legislated for a plebiscite that contained an option that most MPs didn't think would happen (and, I would venture to suggest, many of them had no intention of implementing even if it did) then we wouldn't be in this mess.
On topic, any delay will show that Brexit is a movable body. It would also cripple the confidence of many Leavers. Everything would feel much more contingent.
In other words, I agree with OGH and it would be a very big moment.
All Brexit now has going for it is it's inevitability. If that is taken away from it everything is possible.
Can anyone comment on what would be required legislatively to bring around a referendum before 29th March, given that the existing organisational structure requires around six months between legislation and referendum?
I went thru this the other day. The relevant legislation (ppera 2000) lays down the timescales to allow bodies to register pro and con and present their arguments to the country. From memory, that's around eight weeks. The referendum itself has(?) to be initiated by an act, and to pass an act itself takes time. So we're pretty much at the threshold now.
Now, you can pass an act that specifies a shorter period and the ppera allows this. But I imagine it would be judicial reviewed within seconds in the unlikely event it gets passed.
Thanks for that
I agree with you that we are out of time for a referendum, even if we could agree a short A50 extension up to the EU elections.
On topic, any delay will show that Brexit is a movable body. It would also cripple the confidence of many Leavers. Everything would feel much more contingent.
In other words, I agree with OGH and it would be a very big moment.
In would also completely neuter the project fear about civil unrest after revocation. Either the extension will happen without disorder, and the bluff will have been called, or there will be disorder, and we'll then be in a position were anything other than a subsequent revocation will be seen as caving in to the mob.
I very much doubt that cancelling Brexit will lead to any serious outbreaks of violence.
Quite what it will do to the public's already low opinion of politicians, and to levels of political engagement and electoral participation, is another matter.
Forgive my cynicism but all this talk of A50 being extended is very conveniently timed re Tuesday's vote. It smacks of the Tory whips to panic Brexiter deal refusniks that there will be no Brexit at all.
If the deal is not agreed it is very likely there won’t be a Brexit.
In the event of her deal being defeated, I think Mrs May will throw in the towel and say it is up to parliament to decide and enable, as government, whatever the majority of MPs decide. I think there would be a large majority supporting her deal or remain and could agree to her Deal subject to a Deal/Remain referendum. The EU would agree to an extension for that.
Ah, the old EU gambit. Keep them voting until you get the right answer.
Isn't the essence of democracy that people have the right to keep voting until they find the right answer?
Nope. The essence of democracy is the people decide what the right answer is and then the politicians act on that.
Nope. The essence of OUR democracy is that people decide on who will represent them, and those people (MPs) decide what is in the interests of the people.
But this is boring isn't it? Let's just agree to disagree.
That, however, is at the root of all our problems: representative democracy and direct democracy don't make for easy bedfellows.
If Parliament hadn't legislated for a plebiscite that contained an option that most MPs didn't think would happen (and, I would venture to suggest, many of them had no intention of implementing even if it did) then we wouldn't be in this mess.
The legal circle was squared by making the referendum advisory only. A fact that might become relevant soon.
Also worth remembering that nothing was promised in the referendum about timescale. The PM backed by Parliament triggered A50, and it isn't dishonouring the vote in itself for the same decision makers to extend or revoke, if the stated intention is to progress the process over a longer timescale.
Dr. Foxy, an astute point, but the Ratner comparison is not for the UK within the EU but the UK's pro-EU political class within this country.
Teach the electorate their views can be ignored and they'll split between apathy, voting for one mainstream party just because they loathe the other, or going for new (perhaps more extreme) parties.
Both within and without the country it is the Ratners moment.
Ratner famously said "some of our products are total crap*". Reputational damage certainly, but like how Brexit has exposed some of our politicians as total crap too, painful because it was true. I also think some of our politicians will come out with enhanced reputations too though, so have quietly lumped on Yvette asnext Lab leader.
*obviously not including Mrs Foxys engagement ring from Tooting Ratners in 1989!
On topic, any delay will show that Brexit is a movable body. It would also cripple the confidence of many Leavers. Everything would feel much more contingent.
In other words, I agree with OGH and it would be a very big moment.
In would also completely neuter the project fear about civil unrest after revocation. Either the extension will happen without disorder, and the bluff will have been called, or there will be disorder, and we'll then be in a position were anything other than a subsequent revocation will be seen as caving in to the mob.
I very much doubt that cancelling Brexit will lead to any serious outbreaks of violence.
Quite what it will do to the public's already low opinion of politicians, and to levels of political engagement and electoral participation, is another matter.
Protecting the image of politicians is the worst possible reason for going ahead with Brexit. The national interest comes ahead of the vanity of a few hundred people.
On topic, any delay will show that Brexit is a movable body. It would also cripple the confidence of many Leavers. Everything would feel much more contingent.
In other words, I agree with OGH and it would be a very big moment.
In would also completely neuter the project fear about civil unrest after revocation. Either the extension will happen without disorder, and the bluff will have been called, or there will be disorder, and we'll then be in a position were anything other than a subsequent revocation will be seen as caving in to the mob.
I very much doubt that cancelling Brexit will lead to any serious outbreaks of violence.
Quite what it will do to the public's already low opinion of politicians, and to levels of political engagement and electoral participation, is another matter.
Protecting the image of politicians is the worst possible reason for going ahead with Brexit. The national interest comes ahead of the vanity of a few hundred people.
Forgive my cynicism but all this talk of A50 being extended is very conveniently timed re Tuesday's vote. It smacks of the Tory whips to panic Brexiter deal refusniks that there will be no Brexit at all.
If the deal is not agreed it is very likely there won’t be a Brexit.
In the event of her deal being defeated, I think Mrs May will throw in the towel and say it is up to parliament to decide and enable, as government, whatever the majority of MPs decide. I think there would be a large majority supporting her deal or remain and could agree to her Deal subject to a Deal/Remain referendum. The EU would agree to an extension for that.
Ah, the old EU gambit. Keep them voting until you get the right answer.
Isn't the essence of democracy that people have the right to keep voting until they find the right answer?
Nope. The essence of democracy is the people decide what the right answer is and then the politicians act on that.
Nope. The essence of OUR democracy is that people decide on who will represent them, and those people (MPs) decide what is in the interests of the people.
But this is boring isn't it? Let's just agree to disagree.
That, however, is at the root of all our problems: representative democracy and direct democracy don't make for easy bedfellows.
If Parliament hadn't legislated for a plebiscite that contained an option that most MPs didn't think would happen (and, I would venture to suggest, many of them had no intention of implementing even if it did) then we wouldn't be in this mess.
The legal circle was squared by making the referendum advisory only. A fact that might become relevant soon.
Another reason it had to be advisory is that there was no single definable action that followed from a Leave vote.
A second referendum could fix this by offering a binding choice between ratification of the withdrawal agreement and revocation of Article 50. Either of those things would immediately discharge the referendum mandate and not constrain any future choices.
On topic, any delay will show that Brexit is a movable body. It would also cripple the confidence of many Leavers. Everything would feel much more contingent.
In other words, I agree with OGH and it would be a very big moment.
In would also completely neuter the project fear about civil unrest after revocation. Either the extension will happen without disorder, and the bluff will have been called, or there will be disorder, and we'll then be in a position were anything other than a subsequent revocation will be seen as caving in to the mob.
I very much doubt that cancelling Brexit will lead to any serious outbreaks of violence.
Quite what it will do to the public's already low opinion of politicians, and to levels of political engagement and electoral participation, is another matter.
Protecting the image of politicians is the worst possible reason for going ahead with Brexit. The national interest comes ahead of the vanity of a few hundred people.
Keeping voter’s faith in democracy is.
Going ahead with something that the majority of people do not want, or no longer want, just makes a mockery of democracy.
On topic, any delay will show that Brexit is a movable body. It would also cripple the confidence of many Leavers. Everything would feel much more contingent.
In other words, I agree with OGH and it would be a very big moment.
In would also completely neuter the project fear about civil unrest after revocation. Either the extension will happen without disorder, and the bluff will have been called, or there will be disorder, and we'll then be in a position were anything other than a subsequent revocation will be seen as caving in to the mob.
I very much doubt that cancelling Brexit will lead to any serious outbreaks of violence.
Quite what it will do to the public's already low opinion of politicians, and to levels of political engagement and electoral participation, is another matter.
Protecting the image of politicians is the worst possible reason for going ahead with Brexit. The national interest comes ahead of the vanity of a few hundred people.
Keeping voter’s faith in democracy is.
Going ahead with this nonsense and damaging the country without a direct mandate would certainly be both undemocratic and undermine voters' faith, once they feel the consequences.
Dr. Foxy, an astute point, but the Ratner comparison is not for the UK within the EU but the UK's pro-EU political class within this country.
Teach the electorate their views can be ignored and they'll split between apathy, voting for one mainstream party just because they loathe the other, or going for new (perhaps more extreme) parties.
Most voters are already forced either to vote for the party they least dislike, or a party they think is really crap to block one they believe is even worse.
If there is a further widespread collapse in confidence following a cancellation of Brexit, then I don't think the main problem will be a far-Right surge - one might very well happen, but not to the extent that it'll get them very far under FPTP - but mass abstention. There's no shortage of people out there who are already deeply sceptical about the value of voting: that cohort can only grow if there's a cast-iron example of their will being thwarted in such a brazen fashion.
Forgive my cynicism but all this talk of A50 being extended is very conveniently timed re Tuesday's vote. It smacks of the Tory whips to panic Brexiter deal refusniks that there will be no Brexit at all.
If the deal is not agreed it is very likely there won’t be a Brexit.
In the event of her deal being defeated, I think Mrs May will throw in the towel and say it is up to parliament to decide and enable, as government, whatever the majority of MPs decide. I think there would be a large majority supporting her deal or remain and could agree to her Deal subject to a Deal/Remain referendum. The EU would agree to an extension for that.
Ah, the old EU gambit. Keep them voting until you get the right answer.
Isn't the essence of democracy that people have the right to keep voting until they find the right answer?
Nope. The essence of democracy is the people decide what the right answer is and then the politicians act on that.
Nope. The essence of OUR democracy is that people decide on who will represent them, and those people (MPs) decide what is in the interests of the people.
But this is boring isn't it? Let's just agree to disagree.
That, however, is at the root of all our problems: representative democracy and direct democracy don't make for easy bedfellows.
If Parliament hadn't legislated for a plebiscite that contained an option that most MPs didn't think would happen (and, I would venture to suggest, many of them had no intention of implementing even if it did) then we wouldn't be in this mess.
The legal circle was squared by making the referendum advisory only. A fact that might become relevant soon.
But Cameron explicitly said in millions of taxpayer-funded leaflets that the decision, whatever it was, would be implemented.
On topic, any delay will show that Brexit is a movable body. It would also cripple the confidence of many Leavers. Everything would feel much more contingent.
In other words, I agree with OGH and it would be a very big moment.
In would also completely neuter the project fear about civil unrest after revocation. Either the extension will happen without disorder, and the bluff will have been called, or there will be disorder, and we'll then be in a position were anything other than a subsequent revocation will be seen as caving in to the mob.
I very much doubt that cancelling Brexit will lead to any serious outbreaks of violence.
Quite what it will do to the public's already low opinion of politicians, and to levels of political engagement and electoral participation, is another matter.
It probably means the death of the Conservative party. I won't say I couldn't see myself voting for them again *ever* but it would be a very, very, very long time before I considered putting my X in that box again. I dare say I'm not the only one.
Forgive my cynicism but all this talk of A50 being extended is very conveniently timed re Tuesday's vote. It smacks of the Tory whips to panic Brexiter deal refusniks that there will be no Brexit at all.
If the deal is not agreed it is very likely there won’t be a Brexit.
In the event of her deal being defeated, I think Mrs May will throw in the towel and say it is up to parliament to decide and enable, as government, whatever the majority of MPs decide. I think there would be a large majority supporting her deal or remain and could agree to her Deal subject to a Deal/Remain referendum. The EU would agree to an extension for that.
Ah, the old EU gambit. Keep them voting until you get the right answer.
Isn't the essence of democracy that people have the right to keep voting until they find the right answer?
Nope. The essence of democracy is the people decide what the right answer is and then the politicians act on that.
Nope. The essence of OUR democracy is that people decide on who will represent them, and those people (MPs) decide what is in the interests of the people.
But this is boring isn't it? Let's just agree to disagree.
That, however, is at the root of all our problems: representative democracy and direct democracy don't make for easy bedfellows.
If Parliament hadn't legislated for a plebiscite that contained an option that most MPs didn't think would happen (and, I would venture to suggest, many of them had no intention of implementing even if it did) then we wouldn't be in this mess.
The legal circle was squared by making the referendum advisory only. A fact that might become relevant soon.
But Cameron explicitly said in millions of taxpayer-funded leaflets that the decision, whatever it was, would be implemented.
Two and a half years later and we haven't found an acceptable or realistic way to do so. And Cameron is gone.
Forgive my cynicism but all this talk of A50 being extended is very conveniently timed re Tuesday's vote. It smacks of the Tory whips to panic Brexiter deal refusniks that there will be no Brexit at all.
If the deal is not agreed it is very likely there won’t be a Brexit.
In the event of her deal being defeated, I think Mrs May will throw in the towel and say it is up to parliament to decide and enable, as government, whatever the majority of MPs decide. I think there would be a large majority supporting her deal or remain and could agree to her Deal subject to a Deal/Remain referendum. The EU would agree to an extension for that.
Ah, the old EU gambit. Keep them voting until you get the right answer.
I don't think we can justifiably pin this one on Brussels. If there is a second referendum, it'll be the work of Parliament and Parliament alone.
I know, it’s shocking that remainers are stooping to the EU’s level.
Usual EU tactics. Dictate things behind the scenes, get idiot national politicians to front things. Easy deniability.
Can anyone believe the remain efforts since the vote haven't been organised in complete alignment with the EU?
Forgive my cynicism but all this talk of A50 being extended is very conveniently timed re Tuesday's vote. It smacks of the Tory whips to panic Brexiter deal refusniks that there will be no Brexit at all.
If the deal is not agreed it is very likely there won’t be a Brexit.
In the event of her deal being defeated, I think Mrs May will throw in the towel and say it is up to parliament to decide and enable, as government, whatever the majority of MPs decide. I think there would be a large majority supporting her deal or remain and could agree to her Deal subject to a Deal/Remain referendum. The EU would agree to an extension for that.
Ah, the old EU gambit. Keep them voting until you get the right answer.
I don't think we can justifiably pin this one on Brussels. If there is a second referendum, it'll be the work of Parliament and Parliament alone.
I know, it’s shocking that remainers are stooping to the EU’s level.
Usual EU tactics. Dictate things behind the scenes, get idiot national politicians to front things. Easy deniability.
Can anyone believe the remain efforts since the vote haven't been organised in complete alignment with the EU?
On topic, any delay will show that Brexit is a movable body. It would also cripple the confidence of many Leavers. Everything would feel much more contingent.
In other words, I agree with OGH and it would be a very big moment.
In would also completely neuter the project fear about civil unrest after revocation. Either the extension will happen without disorder, and the bluff will have been called, or there will be disorder, and we'll then be in a position were anything other than a subsequent revocation will be seen as caving in to the mob.
I very much doubt that cancelling Brexit will lead to any serious outbreaks of violence.
Quite what it will do to the public's already low opinion of politicians, and to levels of political engagement and electoral participation, is another matter.
It probably means the death of the Conservative party. I won't say I couldn't see myself voting for them again *ever* but it would be a very, very, very long time before I considered putting my X in that box again. I dare say I'm not the only one.
I've just answered a YouGov poll on voting intention. I guess one is due soon.
Forgive my cynicism but all this talk of A50 being extended is very conveniently timed re Tuesday's vote. It smacks of the Tory whips to panic Brexiter deal refusniks that there will be no Brexit at all.
If the deal is not agreed it is very likely there won’t be a Brexit.
In the event of her deal being defeated, I think Mrs May will throw in the towel and say it is up to parliament to decide and enable, as government, whatever the majority of MPs decide. I think there would be a large majority supporting her deal or remain and could agree to her Deal subject to a Deal/Remain referendum. The EU would agree to an extension for that.
Ah, the old EU gambit. Keep them voting until you get the right answer.
I don't think we can justifiably pin this one on Brussels. If there is a second referendum, it'll be the work of Parliament and Parliament alone.
I know, it’s shocking that remainers are stooping to the EU’s level.
Usual EU tactics. Dictate things behind the scenes, get idiot national politicians to front things. Easy deniability.
Can anyone believe the remain efforts since the vote haven't been organised in complete alignment with the EU?
So the leavers expected not to have to work up and build public support for any sort of realistic plan, and to be able to resign and run away from taking any responsibility, yet somehow the magic elves would do it all for them?
Even now very many of them won't vote for the only Brexit plan on offer.
Forgive my cynicism but all this talk of A50 being extended is very conveniently timed re Tuesday's vote. It smacks of the Tory whips to panic Brexiter deal refusniks that there will be no Brexit at all.
If the deal is not agreed it is very likely there won’t be a Brexit.
In the event of her deal being defeated, I think Mrs May will throw in the towel and say it is up to parliament to decide and enable, as government, whatever the majority of MPs decide. I think there would be a large majority supporting her deal or remain and could agree to her Deal subject to a Deal/Remain referendum. The EU would agree to an extension for that.
Ah, the old EU gambit. Keep them voting until you get the right answer.
I don't think we can justifiably pin this one on Brussels. If there is a second referendum, it'll be the work of Parliament and Parliament alone.
I know, it’s shocking that remainers are stooping to the EU’s level.
Usual EU tactics. Dictate things behind the scenes, get idiot national politicians to front things. Easy deniability.
Can anyone believe the remain efforts since the vote haven't been organised in complete alignment with the EU?
Who do you consider "the EU" and are any of them British?
On topic, any delay will show that Brexit is a movable body. It would also cripple the confidence of many Leavers. Everything would feel much more contingent.
In other words, I agree with OGH and it would be a very big moment.
In would also completely neuter the project fear about civil unrest after revocation. Either the extension will happen without disorder, and the bluff will have been called, or there will be disorder, and we'll then be in a position were anything other than a subsequent revocation will be seen as caving in to the mob.
I very much doubt that cancelling Brexit will lead to any serious outbreaks of violence.
Quite what it will do to the public's already low opinion of politicians, and to levels of political engagement and electoral participation, is another matter.
Protecting the image of politicians is the worst possible reason for going ahead with Brexit. The national interest comes ahead of the vanity of a few hundred people.
Forgive my cynicism but all this talk of A50 being extended is very conveniently timed re Tuesday's vote. It smacks of the Tory whips to panic Brexiter deal refusniks that there will be no Brexit at all.
If the deal is not agreed it is very likely there won’t be a Brexit.
In the event of her deal being defeated, I think Mrs May will throw in the towel and say it is up to parliament to decide and enable, as government, whatever the majority of MPs decide. I think there would be a large majority supporting her deal or remain and could agree to her Deal subject to a Deal/Remain referendum. The EU would agree to an extension for that.
Ah, the old EU gambit. Keep them voting until you get the right answer.
I don't think we can justifiably pin this one on Brussels. If there is a second referendum, it'll be the work of Parliament and Parliament alone.
I know, it’s shocking that remainers are stooping to the EU’s level.
Usual EU tactics. Dictate things behind the scenes, get idiot national politicians to front things. Easy deniability.
Can anyone believe the remain efforts since the vote haven't been organised in complete alignment with the EU?
We are the EU, or at least 48% of us were in 2016, likely to be more now.
Forgive my cynicism but all this talk of A50 being extended is very conveniently timed re Tuesday's vote. It smacks of the Tory whips to panic Brexiter deal refusniks that there will be no Brexit at all.
If the deal is not agreed it is very likely there won’t be a Brexit.
In the event of her deal being defeated, I think Mrs May will throw in the towel and say it is up to parliament to decide and enable, as government, whatever the majority of MPs decide. I think there would be a large majority supporting her deal or remain and could agree to her Deal subject to a Deal/Remain referendum. The EU would agree to an extension for that.
Ah, the old EU gambit. Keep them voting until you get the right answer.
I don't think we can justifiably pin this one on Brussels. If there is a second referendum, it'll be the work of Parliament and Parliament alone.
I know, it’s shocking that remainers are stooping to the EU’s level.
Usual EU tactics. Dictate things behind the scenes, get idiot national politicians to front things. Easy deniability.
Can anyone believe the remain efforts since the vote haven't been organised in complete alignment with the EU?
So the leavers expected not to have to work up and build public support for any sort of realistic plan, and to be able to resign and run away from taking any responsibility, yet somehow the magic elves would do it all for them?
Even now very many of them won't vote for the only Brexit plan on offer.
Leavers have been completely played by May running parallel negotiations in secret, under the cover of her lying big set piece speeches. Chequers was the big reveal when the leavers knew she'd stitched them up.
He is running rings round the ERG but still representing a very small part of the conservative mps
Surely whether you support or do not support him, the impact he is having as private member is impressive, especially given that he successful because of his superior knowledge and precision. A real grown up. Anyone would want him on their side.
Forgive my cynicism but all this talk of A50 being extended is very conveniently timed re Tuesday's vote. It smacks of the Tory whips to panic Brexiter deal refusniks that there will be no Brexit at all.
If the deal is not agreed it is very likely there won’t be a Brexit.
In the event of her deal being defeated, I think Mrs May will throw in the towel and say it is up to parliament to decide and enable, as government, whatever the majority of MPs decide. I think there would be a large majority supporting her deal or remain and could agree to her Deal subject to a Deal/Remain referendum. The EU would agree to an extension for that.
Ah, the old EU gambit. Keep them voting until you get the right answer.
I don't think we can justifiably pin this one on Brussels. If there is a second referendum, it'll be the work of Parliament and Parliament alone.
I know, it’s shocking that remainers are stooping to the EU’s level.
Usual EU tactics. Dictate things behind the scenes, get idiot national politicians to front things. Easy deniability.
Can anyone believe the remain efforts since the vote haven't been organised in complete alignment with the EU?
So the leavers expected not to have to work up and build public support for any sort of realistic plan, and to be able to resign and run away from taking any responsibility, yet somehow the magic elves would do it all for them?
Even now very many of them won't vote for the only Brexit plan on offer.
Leavers have been completely played by May running parallel negotiations in secret, under the cover of her lying big set piece speeches. Chequers was the big reveal when the leavers knew she'd stitched them up.
Her deal being crap is solely down to her.
I don't think the 'we're easily fooled' defence solves much even if it is true.
Forgive my cynicism but all this talk of A50 being extended is very conveniently timed re Tuesday's vote. It smacks of the Tory whips to panic Brexiter deal refusniks that there will be no Brexit at all.
If the deal is not agreed it is very likely there won’t be a Brexit.
In the event of her deal being defeated, I think Mrs May will throw in the towel and say it is up to parliament to decide and enable, as government, whatever the majority of MPs decide. I think there would be a large majority supporting her deal or remain and could agree to her Deal subject to a Deal/Remain referendum. The EU would agree to an extension for that.
Ah, the old EU gambit. Keep them voting until you get the right answer.
I don't think we can justifiably pin this one on Brussels. If there is a second referendum, it'll be the work of Parliament and Parliament alone.
I know, it’s shocking that remainers are stooping to the EU’s level.
Usual EU tactics. Dictate things behind the scenes, get idiot national politicians to front things. Easy deniability.
Can anyone believe the remain efforts since the vote haven't been organised in complete alignment with the EU?
So the leavers expected not to have to work up and build public support for any sort of realistic plan, and to be able to resign and run away from taking any responsibility, yet somehow the magic elves would do it all for them?
Even now very many of them won't vote for the only Brexit plan on offer.
Leavers have been completely played by May running parallel negotiations in secret, under the cover of her lying big set piece speeches. Chequers was the big reveal when the leavers knew she'd stitched them up.
They cheered Lancaster House to the rafters when she told them she was open to staying in a customs union:
Whether that means we must reach a completely new customs agreement, become an associate member of the Customs Union in some way, or remain a signatory to some elements of it, I hold no preconceived position.
On topic, any delay will show that Brexit is a movable body. It would also cripple the confidence of many Leavers. Everything would feel much more contingent.
In other words, I agree with OGH and it would be a very big moment.
In would also completely neuter the project fear about civil unrest after revocation. Either the extension will happen without disorder, and the bluff will have been called, or there will be disorder, and we'll then be in a position were anything other than a subsequent revocation will be seen as caving in to the mob.
I very much doubt that cancelling Brexit will lead to any serious outbreaks of violence.
Quite what it will do to the public's already low opinion of politicians, and to levels of political engagement and electoral participation, is another matter.
Protecting the image of politicians is the worst possible reason for going ahead with Brexit. The national interest comes ahead of the vanity of a few hundred people.
Keeping voter’s faith in democracy is.
Going ahead with this nonsense and damaging the country without a direct mandate would certainly be both undemocratic and undermine voters' faith, once they feel the consequences.
There is a direct mandate to leave. You may have missed it.
Forgive my cynicism but all this talk of A50 being extended is very conveniently timed re Tuesday's vote. It smacks of the Tory whips to panic Brexiter deal refusniks that there will be no Brexit at all.
If the deal is not agreed it is very likely there won’t be a Brexit.
In the event of her deal being defeated, I think Mrs May will throw in the towel and say it is up to parliament to decide and enable, as government, whatever the majority of MPs decide. I think there would be a large majority supporting her deal or remain and could agree to her Deal subject to a Deal/Remain referendum. The EU would agree to an extension for that.
Ah, the old EU gambit. Keep them voting until you get the right answer.
I don't think we can justifiably pin this one on Brussels. If there is a second referendum, it'll be the work of Parliament and Parliament alone.
I know, it’s shocking that remainers are stooping to the EU’s level.
Usual EU tactics. Dictate things behind the scenes, get idiot national politicians to front things. Easy deniability.
Can anyone believe the remain efforts since the vote haven't been organised in complete alignment with the EU?
So the leavers expected not to have to work up and build public support for any sort of realistic plan, and to be able to resign and run away from taking any responsibility, yet somehow the magic elves would do it all for them?
Even now very many of them won't vote for the only Brexit plan on offer.
Leavers have been completely played by May running parallel negotiations in secret, under the cover of her lying big set piece speeches. Chequers was the big reveal when the leavers knew she'd stitched them up.
Her deal being crap is solely down to her.
And where is their alternative plan?
If they are that useless and easily led, just as well we didn't rely solely on them to negotiate with the EU, eh?
Closer to the truth is that May has got the least damaging deal she could, in the circumstances. Worse than where we are, but better than going cold turkey. Leavers know it won't deliver the unicorns and are covering their asses rather than taking any responsibility, let alone control.
On topic, any delay will show that Brexit is a movable body. It would also cripple the confidence of many Leavers. Everything would feel much more contingent.
In other words, I agree with OGH and it would be a very big moment.
In would also completely neuter the project fear about civil unrest after revocation. Either the extension will happen without disorder, and the bluff will have been called, or there will be disorder, and we'll then be in a position were anything other than a subsequent revocation will be seen as caving in to the mob.
I very much doubt that cancelling Brexit will lead to any serious outbreaks of violence.
Quite what it will do to the public's already low opinion of politicians, and to levels of political engagement and electoral participation, is another matter.
Protecting the image of politicians is the worst possible reason for going ahead with Brexit. The national interest comes ahead of the vanity of a few hundred people.
Keeping voter’s faith in democracy is.
Going ahead with something that the majority of people do not want, or no longer want, just makes a mockery of democracy.
Not if there's mandate for it. Ditching a policy because you think 50% -1 are opposed to it would be a strange way for a government to act.
On topic, any delay will show that Brexit is a movable body. It would also cripple the confidence of many Leavers. Everything would feel much more contingent.
It's a very smart thing to call for because it works for people who genuinely think we need more time to sort something out, but also works for people who just want to remain but are not yet confident enough to just come out and say so yet.
Forgive my cynicism but all this talk of A50 being extended is very conveniently timed re Tuesday's vote. It smacks of the Tory whips to panic Brexiter deal refusniks that there will be no Brexit at all.
If the deal is not agreed it is very likely there won’t be a Brexit.
In the event of her deal being defeated, I think Mrs May will throw in the towel and say it is up to parliament to decide and enable, as government, whatever the majority of MPs decide. I think there would be a large majority supporting her deal or remain and could agree to her Deal subject to a Deal/Remain referendum. The EU would agree to an extension for that.
Ah, the old EU gambit. Keep them voting until you get the right answer.
Isn't the essence of democracy that people have the right to keep voting until they find the right answer?
Nope. The essence of democracy is the people decide what the right answer is and then the politicians act on that.
Nope. The essence of OUR democracy is that people decide on who will represent them, and those people (MPs) decide what is in the interests of the people.
But this is boring isn't it? Let's just agree to disagree.
That, however, is at the root of all our problems: representative democracy and direct democracy don't make for easy bedfellows.
If Parliament hadn't legislated for a plebiscite that contained an option that most MPs didn't think would happen (and, I would venture to suggest, many of them had no intention of implementing even if it did) then we wouldn't be in this mess.
The legal circle was squared by making the referendum advisory only. A fact that might become relevant soon.
But Cameron explicitly said in millions of taxpayer-funded leaflets that the decision, whatever it was, would be implemented.
Two and a half years later and we haven't found an acceptable or realistic way to do so. And Cameron is gone.
More importantly in 2017 the two main parties both campaigned on leaving the EU. There were a couple of parties that campaigned explicitly to stay in the EU but the one in Scotland saw its vote drop 13% from the previous election and the other one managed to secure a whole 7.4% of the vote and saw its vote share drop as well.
This Parliament was elected overwhelmingly on an explicit mandate to take the UK out of the EU. Any other result is a complete betrayal.
On topic, any delay will show that Brexit is a movable body. It would also cripple the confidence of many Leavers. Everything would feel much more contingent.
In other words, I agree with OGH and it would be a very big moment.
In would also completely neuter the project fear about civil unrest after revocation. Either the extension will happen without disorder, and the bluff will have been called, or there will be disorder, and we'll then be in a position were anything other than a subsequent revocation will be seen as caving in to the mob.
I very much doubt that cancelling Brexit will lead to any serious outbreaks of violence.
Quite what it will do to the public's already low opinion of politicians, and to levels of political engagement and electoral participation, is another matter.
Protecting the image of politicians is the worst possible reason for going ahead with Brexit. The national interest comes ahead of the vanity of a few hundred people.
Keeping voter’s faith in democracy is.
Going ahead with something that the majority of people do not want, or no longer want, just makes a mockery of democracy.
Not if there's mandate for it. Ditching a policy because you think 50% -1 are opposed to it would be a strange way for a government to act.
Active support for May's deal is in the teens. It's nowhere close to 50%-1.
On topic, any delay will show that Brexit is a movable body. It would also cripple the confidence of many Leavers. Everything would feel much more contingent.
In other words, I agree with OGH and it would be a very big moment.
In would also completely neuter the project fear about civil unrest after revocation. Either the extension will happen without disorder, and the bluff will have been called, or there will be disorder, and we'll then be in a position were anything other than a subsequent revocation will be seen as caving in to the mob.
I very much doubt that cancelling Brexit will lead to any serious outbreaks of violence.
Quite what it will do to the public's already low opinion of politicians, and to levels of political engagement and electoral participation, is another matter.
Protecting the image of politicians is the worst possible reason for going ahead with Brexit. The national interest comes ahead of the vanity of a few hundred people.
Keeping voter’s faith in democracy is.
Going ahead with this nonsense and damaging the country without a direct mandate would certainly be both undemocratic and undermine voters' faith, once they feel the consequences.
There is both a direct mandate (2016) and an indirect mandate (2017). You just don't like it and so are thrashing around for ways to legitimise your dislike of democracy.
Not if there's mandate for it. Ditching a policy because you think 50% -1 are opposed to it would be a strange way for a government to act.
I think one of the most important things that Brexit has taught us is that harping on endlessly about real or imagined mandates is entirely futile behaviour if you don't have the votes to deliver it.
He is running rings round the ERG but still representing a very small part of the conservative mps
Surely whether you support or do not support him, the impact he is having as private member is impressive, especially given that he successful because of his superior knowledge and precision. A real grown up. Anyone would want him on their side.
I am neutral to the extent I support TM deal or remain, if no deal is the other option
I do agree he is a grown up serious politician and if ERG had had anyone near his intellect they may have made a better case for their ruinous no deal brexit
On topic, any delay will show that Brexit is a movable body. It would also cripple the confidence of many Leavers. Everything would feel much more contingent.
In other words, I agree with OGH and it would be a very big moment.
In would also completely neuter the project fear about civil unrest after revocation. Either the extension will happen without disorder, and the bluff will have been called, or there will be disorder, and we'll then be in a position were anything other than a subsequent revocation will be seen as caving in to the mob.
I very much doubt that cancelling Brexit will lead to any serious outbreaks of violence.
Quite what it will do to the public's already low opinion of politicians, and to levels of political engagement and electoral participation, is another matter.
Protecting the image of politicians is the worst possible reason for going ahead with Brexit. The national interest comes ahead of the vanity of a few hundred people.
Keeping voter’s faith in democracy is.
Going ahead with this nonsense and damaging the country without a direct mandate would certainly be both undemocratic and undermine voters' faith, once they feel the consequences.
There is both a direct mandate (2016) and an indirect mandate (2017). You just don't like it and so are thrashing around for ways to legitimise your dislike of democracy.
Over 17 million people voted against May's Brexit in 2017. There is no mandate for it at all.
Mr. CD13, remaining, with no second referendum, would be manna from heaven for the far right.
That's the actual far right, not the Corbynite definition of Blairites and everyone rightwards of them.
If there's one thing history has taught us it's that if we appease the far right, they cease to be a problem
Or perhaps you simply act in accordance with democracy, rather than tell people they can't have what they voted for. It's not about appeasing the far right. It's about corralling moderate voters in their direction since, barring abstention, they will have nowhere else to go.
Forgive my cynicism but all this talk of A50 being extended is very conveniently timed re Tuesday's vote. It smacks of the Tory whips to panic Brexiter deal refusniks that there will be no Brexit at all.
If the deal is not agreed it is very likely there won’t be a Brexit.
In the event of her deal being defeated, I think Mrs May will throw in the towel and say it is up to parliament to decide and enable, as government, whatever the majority of MPs decide. I think there would be a large majority supporting her deal or remain and could agree to her Deal subject to a Deal/Remain referendum. The EU would agree to an extension for that.
Ah, the old EU gambit. Keep them voting until you get the right answer.
Isn't the essence of democracy that people have the right to keep voting until they find the right answer?
Nope. The essence of democracy is the people decide what the right answer is and then the politicians act on that.
Nope. The essence of OUR democracy is that people decide on who will represent them, and those people (MPs) decide what is in the interests of the people.
But this is boring isn't it? Let's just agree to disagree.
No lets not. Every time you make a false claim I will continue to point out how wrong you are.
Edit: Besides I have not forgotten that a few weeks ago you were the one claiming that democracy was not a good thing.
On topic, any delay will show that Brexit is a movable body. It would also cripple the confidence of many Leavers. Everything would feel much more contingent.
It's a very smart thing to call for because it works for people who genuinely think we need more time to sort something out, but also works for people who just want to remain but are not yet confident enough to just come out and say so yet.
On topic, any delay will show that Brexit is a movable body. It would also cripple the confidence of many Leavers. Everything would feel much more contingent.
In other words, I agree with OGH and it would be a very big moment.
In would also completely neuter the project fear about civil unrest after revocation. Either the extension will happen without disorder, and the bluff will have been called, or there will be disorder, and we'll then be in a position were anything other than a subsequent revocation will be seen as caving in to the mob.
I very much doubt that cancelling Brexit will lead to any serious outbreaks of violence.
Quite what it will do to the public's already low opinion of politicians, and to levels of political engagement and electoral participation, is another matter.
Protecting the image of politicians is the worst possible reason for going ahead with Brexit. The national interest comes ahead of the vanity of a few hundred people.
Keeping voter’s faith in democracy is.
Going ahead with this nonsense and damaging the country without a direct mandate would certainly be both undemocratic and undermine voters' faith, once they feel the consequences.
There is both a direct mandate (2016) and an indirect mandate (2017). You just don't like it and so are thrashing around for ways to legitimise your dislike of democracy.
Over 17 million people voted against May's Brexit in 2017. There is no mandate for it at all.
Using that logic, there certainly is not a mandate for remaining, or delaying Brexit
On topic, any delay will show that Brexit is a movable body. It would also cripple the confidence of many Leavers. Everything would feel much more contingent.
In other words, I agree with OGH and it would be a very big moment.
In would also completely neuter the project fear about civil unrest after revocation. Either the extension will happen without disorder, and the bluff will have been called, or there will be disorder, and we'll then be in a position were anything other than a subsequent revocation will be seen as caving in to the mob.
I very much doubt that cancelling Brexit will lead to any serious outbreaks of violence.
Quite what it will do to the public's already low opinion of politicians, and to levels of political engagement and electoral participation, is another matter.
Protecting the image of politicians is the worst possible reason for going ahead with Brexit. The national interest comes ahead of the vanity of a few hundred people.
Keeping voter’s faith in democracy is.
Going ahead with this nonsense and damaging the country without a direct mandate would certainly be both undemocratic and undermine voters' faith, once they feel the consequences.
There is both a direct mandate (2016) and an indirect mandate (2017). You just don't like it and so are thrashing around for ways to legitimise your dislike of democracy.
There's no mandate for any one vision of Leave. In fact there's no mandate for May to even attempt to create one, since the voters explicitly denied her the increased majority which she said represented one.
There is both a direct mandate (2016) and an indirect mandate (2017). You just don't like it and so are thrashing around for ways to legitimise your dislike of democracy.
I guess we'll find out on Tuesday just how big May's mandate is...
I find it kind of cute that the very dimmest Brexiteers still haven't figured out that MPs are not delegates, and are not bound by their manifestoes but by their consciences and the effectiveness of the whips.
On topic, any delay will show that Brexit is a movable body. It would also cripple the confidence of many Leavers. Everything would feel much more contingent.
It's a very smart thing to call for because it works for people who genuinely think we need more time to sort something out, but also works for people who just want to remain but are not yet confident enough to just come out and say so yet.
It would be interesting to see polling on whether voters want A50 extended or just to get on with it
Forgive my cynicism but all this talk of A50 being extended is very conveniently timed re Tuesday's vote. It smacks of the Tory whips to panic Brexiter deal refusniks that there will be no Brexit at all.
If the deal is not agreed it is very likely there won’t be a Brexit.
In the event of her deal being defeated, I think Mrs May will throw in the towel and say it is up to parliament to decide and enable, as government, whatever the majority of MPs decide. I think there would be a large majority supporting her deal or remain and could agree to her Deal subject to a Deal/Remain referendum. The EU would agree to an extension for that.
Ah, the old EU gambit. Keep them voting until you get the right answer.
Isn't the essence of democracy that people have the right to keep voting until they find the right answer?
Nope. The essence of democracy is the people decide what the right answer is and then the politicians act on that.
Nope. The essence of OUR democracy is that people decide on who will represent them, and those people (MPs) decide what is in the interests of the people.
But this is boring isn't it? Let's just agree to disagree.
No lets not. Every time you make a false claim I will continue to point out how wrong you are.
Edit: Besides I have not forgotten that a few weeks ago you were the one claiming that democracy was not a good thing.
Democracy is a good thing when people agree with me.
Forgive my cynicism but all this talk of A50 being extended is very conveniently timed re Tuesday's vote. It smacks of the Tory whips to panic Brexiter deal refusniks that there will be no Brexit at all.
If the deal is not agreed it is very likely there won’t be a Brexit.
In the event of her deal being defeated, I think Mrs May will throw in the towel and say it is up to parliament to decide and enable, as government, whatever the majority of MPs decide. I think there would be a large majority supporting her deal or remain and could agree to her Deal subject to a Deal/Remain referendum. The EU would agree to an extension for that.
Ah, the old EU gambit. Keep them voting until you get the right answer.
Isn't the essence of democracy that people have the right to keep voting until they find the right answer?
Nope. The essence of democracy is the people decide what the right answer is and then the politicians act on that.
Now that we have potential answers on offer, the sooner that is done, the better.
They already gave their answer. You just didn't like it.
LOL. Not that I want that, but it would solve some headaches at least.
But on the point in question, I am continually amazed that 'old people die' is still used as a trump card argument. There are much better cases to be made, there's no need to go down that route.
Forgive my cynicism but all this talk of A50 being extended is very conveniently timed re Tuesday's vote. It smacks of the Tory whips to panic Brexiter deal refusniks that there will be no Brexit at all.
If the deal is not agreed it is very likely there won’t be a Brexit.
In the event of her deal being defeated, I think Mrs May will throw in the towel and say it is up to parliament to decide and enable, as government, whatever the majority of MPs decide. I think there would be a large majority supporting her deal or remain and could agree to her Deal subject to a Deal/Remain referendum. The EU would agree to an extension for that.
Ah, the old EU gambit. Keep them voting until you get the right answer.
Isn't the essence of democracy that people have the right to keep voting until they find the right answer?
Nope. The essence of democracy is the people decide what the right answer is and then the politicians act on that.
Nope. The essence of OUR democracy is that people decide on who will represent them, and those people (MPs) decide what is in the interests of the people.
But this is boring isn't it? Let's just agree to disagree.
No lets not. Every time you make a false claim I will continue to point out how wrong you are.
Edit: Besides I have not forgotten that a few weeks ago you were the one claiming that democracy was not a good thing.
Democracy is a good thing when people agree with me.
For the love of God can we just have the Meaningful Vote now. Nothing crystallises until that wavefunction collapses.
I watched some of the debate today in a sparse chamber and genuinely interesting as it was to see views from all areas of the spectrum, not one person said any new thing that hadn't been said - and most of them said that noone had say anything new.
The news that the EU is seeking to get member countries to give up their vetos on tax harmonisation will focus a few Leave minds.and hopefully stiffen their resolve to leave on time. Quite a challenge for ROI too. Deferring our departure is not a realistic option
A deal would have been better but with trade no even discussed, no deal is a lot more attractive option than May’s deal.
On topic, any delay will show that Brexit is a movable body. It would also cripple the confidence of many Leavers. Everything would feel much more contingent.
In other words, I agree with OGH and it would be a very big moment.
In would also completely neuter the project fear about civil unrest after revocation. Either the extension will happen without disorder, and the bluff will have been called, or there will be disorder, and we'll then be in a position were anything other than a subsequent revocation will be seen as caving in to the mob.
I very much doubt that cancelling Brexit will lead to any serious outbreaks of violence.
Quite what it will do to the public's already low opinion of politicians, and to levels of political engagement and electoral participation, is another matter.
Protecting the image of politicians is the worst possible reason for going ahead with Brexit. The national interest comes ahead of the vanity of a few hundred people.
Keeping voter’s faith in democracy is.
Going ahead with this nonsense and damaging the country without a direct mandate would certainly be both undemocratic and undermine voters' faith, once they feel the consequences.
There is both a direct mandate (2016) and an indirect mandate (2017). You just don't like it and so are thrashing around for ways to legitimise your dislike of democracy.
Over 17 million people voted against May's Brexit in 2017. There is no mandate for it at all.
Now William - that is naughty. Both major parties manifestos committed to leaving the EU as you well know. TM deal leaves the EU
LOL. Not that I want that, but it would solve some headaches at least.
But on the point in question, I am continually amazed that 'old people die' is still used as a trump card argument. There are much better cases to be made, there's no need to go down that route.
Used to dismiss the Tories for donkey’s years now.
On topic, any delay will show that Brexit is a movable body. It would also cripple the confidence of many Leavers. Everything would feel much more contingent.
It's a very smart thing to call for because it works for people who genuinely think we need more time to sort something out, but also works for people who just want to remain but are not yet confident enough to just come out and say so yet.
It would be interesting to see polling on whether voters want A50 extended or just to get on with it
We know they do not want No Deal, which is what sticking to the date means.
On topic, any delay will show that Brexit is a movable body. It would also cripple the confidence of many Leavers. Everything would feel much more contingent.
In other words, I agree with OGH and it would be a very big moment.
In would also completely neuter the project fear about civil unrest after revocation. Either the extension will happen without disorder, and the bluff will have been called, or there will be disorder, and we'll then be in a position were anything other than a subsequent revocation will be seen as caving in to the mob.
I very much doubt that cancelling Brexit will lead to any serious outbreaks of violence.
Quite what it will do to the public's already low opinion of politicians, and to levels of political engagement and electoral participation, is another matter.
Protecting the image of politicians is the worst possible reason for going ahead with Brexit. The national interest comes ahead of the vanity of a few hundred people.
Keeping voter’s faith in democracy is.
Going ahead with this nonsense and damaging the country without a direct mandate would certainly be both undemocratic and undermine voters' faith, once they feel the consequences.
There is both a direct mandate (2016) and an indirect mandate (2017). You just don't like it and so are thrashing around for ways to legitimise your dislike of democracy.
Over 17 million people voted against May's Brexit in 2017. There is no mandate for it at all.
Using that logic, there certainly is not a mandate for remaining, or delaying Brexit
For william, it is only logic if it results in the answer 'we must remain'.
Which might well end up being true, but I love it when people tally up every vote against the winner of a GE, since all it points out is that tallying up all the options against anything else does even worse.
Once again we are lead inexorably back to the conclusion that the single best public policy in terms of increasing the overall wellbeing of the nation would be a cull of Boomers.
There is both a direct mandate (2016) and an indirect mandate (2017). You just don't like it and so are thrashing around for ways to legitimise your dislike of democracy.
I guess we'll find out on Tuesday just how big May's mandate is...
I find it kind of cute that the very dimmest Brexiteers still haven't figured out that MPs are not delegates, and are not bound by their manifestoes but by their consciences and the effectiveness of the whips.
If you are going to channel Burke then you should remember what the electorate did to him him at the first opportunity after he decided to ignore their wishes.
On topic, any delay will show that Brexit is a movable body. It would also cripple the confidence of many Leavers. Everything would feel much more contingent.
In other words, I agree with OGH and it would be a very big moment.
In would also completely neuter the project fear about civil unrest after revocation. Either the extension will happen without disorder, and the bluff will have been called, or there will be disorder, and we'll then be in a position were anything other than a subsequent revocation will be seen as caving in to the mob.
I very much doubt that cancelling Brexit will lead to any serious outbreaks of violence.
Quite what it will do to the public's already low opinion of politicians, and to levels of political engagement and electoral participation, is another matter.
Protecting the image of politicians is the worst possible reason for going ahead with Brexit. The national interest comes ahead of the vanity of a few hundred people.
Keeping voter’s faith in democracy is.
Going ahead with something that the majority of people do not want, or no longer want, just makes a mockery of democracy.
Not if there's mandate for it. Ditching a policy because you think 50% -1 are opposed to it would be a strange way for a government to act.
Active support for May's deal is in the teens. It's nowhere close to 50%-1.
But support for Brexit runs at 46-52%, according to poling taken since the deal was published. And, her deal delivers Brexit.
On topic, any delay will show that Brexit is a movable body. It would also cripple the confidence of many Leavers. Everything would feel much more contingent.
In other words, I agree with OGH and it would be a very big moment.
In would also completely neuter the project fear about civil unrest after revocation. Either the extension will happen without disorder, and the bluff will have been called, or there will be disorder, and we'll then be in a position were anything other than a subsequent revocation will be seen as caving in to the mob.
I very much doubt that cancelling Brexit will lead to any serious outbreaks of violence.
Quite what it will do to the public's already low opinion of politicians, and to levels of political engagement and electoral participation, is another matter.
Protecting the image of politicians is the worst possible reason for going ahead with Brexit. The national interest comes ahead of the vanity of a few hundred people.
Keeping voter’s faith in democracy is.
Going ahead with this nonsense and damaging the country without a direct mandate would certainly be both undemocratic and undermine voters' faith, once they feel the consequences.
There is both a direct mandate (2016) and an indirect mandate (2017). You just don't like it and so are thrashing around for ways to legitimise your dislike of democracy.
Over 17 million people voted against May's Brexit in 2017. There is no mandate for it at all.
Now William - that is naughty. Both major parties manifestos committed to leaving the EU as you well know. TM deal leaves the EU
If you read the Labour manifesto it is very carefully worded. And, anyhow, the formal position is that we were each electing individuals to represent us, and collectively they don't seem to like either the deal or no deal.
On topic, any delay will show that Brexit is a movable body. It would also cripple the confidence of many Leavers. Everything would feel much more contingent.
In other words, I agree with OGH and it would be a very big moment.
In would also completely neuter the project fear about civil unrest after revocation. Either the extension will happen without disorder, and the bluff will have been called, or there will be disorder, and we'll then be in a position were anything other than a subsequent revocation will be seen as caving in to the mob.
I very much doubt that cancelling Brexit will lead to any serious outbreaks of violence.
Quite what it will do to the public's already low opinion of politicians, and to levels of political engagement and electoral participation, is another matter.
Protecting the image of politicians is the worst possible reason for going ahead with Brexit. The national interest comes ahead of the vanity of a few hundred people.
Keeping voter’s faith in democracy is.
Going ahead with this nonsense and damaging the country without a direct mandate would certainly be both undemocratic and undermine voters' faith, once they feel the consequences.
There is both a direct mandate (2016) and an indirect mandate (2017). You just don't like it and so are thrashing around for ways to legitimise your dislike of democracy.
There's no mandate for any one vision of Leave. In fact there's no mandate for May to even attempt to create one, since the voters explicitly denied her the increased majority which she said represented one.
For the love of God can we just have the Meaningful Vote now. Nothing crystallises until that wavefunction collapses.
I watched some of the debate today in a sparse chamber and genuinely interesting as it was to see views from all areas of the spectrum, not one person said any new thing that hadn't been said - and most of them said that noone had say anything new.
I congratulate you for putting in such effort to follow the debate in the chamber, such as it was.
But we are, surely, at least getting to the closing point of this phase soon. I was surprised and appalled that the MV was pulled before, mostly since as you say nothing else can occur since they are sticking to very implausible options until it takes place, but they are hopefully reaching a limit now.
On topic, any delay will show that Brexit is a movable body. It would also cripple the confidence of many Leavers. Everything would feel much more contingent.
In other words, I agree with OGH and it would be a very big moment.
In would also completely neuter the project fear about civil unrest after revocation. Either the extension will happen without disorder, and the bluff will have been called, or there will be disorder, and we'll then be in a position were anything other than a subsequent revocation will be seen as caving in to the mob.
I very much doubt that cancelling Brexit will lead to any serious outbreaks of violence.
Quite what it will do to the public's already low opinion of politicians, and to levels of political engagement and electoral participation, is another matter.
Protecting the image of politicians is the worst possible reason for going ahead with Brexit. The national interest comes ahead of the vanity of a few hundred people.
Keeping voter’s faith in democracy is.
Going ahead with this nonsense and damaging the country without a direct mandate would certainly be both undemocratic and undermine voters' faith, once they feel the consequences.
There is both a direct mandate (2016) and an indirect mandate (2017). You just don't like it and so are thrashing around for ways to legitimise your dislike of democracy.
There's no mandate for any one vision of Leave. In fact there's no mandate for May to even attempt to create one, since the voters explicitly denied her the increased majority which she said represented one.
Since both May and Corbyn campaigned in 2017 on the basis we would leave the EU, the vote in favour of that result actually went up substantially on that of 2015.
Well, if we had a majority Tory government, maybe that dismal document would mean something. Waving around a booklet and going THIS IS A MANDATE is not how politics works.
On topic, any delay will show that Brexit is a movable body. It would also cripple the confidence of many Leavers. Everything would feel much more contingent.
In other words, I agree with OGH and it would be a very big moment.
In would also completely neuter the project fear about civil unrest after revocation. Either the extension will happen without disorder, and the bluff will have been called, or there will be disorder, and we'll then be in a position were anything other than a subsequent revocation will be seen as caving in to the mob.
I very much doubt that cancelling Brexit will lead to any serious outbreaks of violence.
Quite what it will do to the public's already low opinion of politicians, and to levels of political engagement and electoral participation, is another matter.
Protecting the image of politicians is the worst possible reason for going ahead with Brexit. The national interest comes ahead of the vanity of a few hundred people.
Keeping voter’s faith in democracy is.
Going ahead with this nonsense and damaging the country without a direct mandate would certainly be both undemocratic and undermine voters' faith, once they feel the consequences.
There is both a direct mandate (2016) and an indirect mandate (2017). You just don't like it and so are thrashing around for ways to legitimise your dislike of democracy.
Over 17 million people voted against May's Brexit in 2017. There is no mandate for it at all.
Now William - that is naughty. Both major parties manifestos committed to leaving the EU as you well know. TM deal leaves the EU
When May called the election her main justification was this:
"In recent weeks, Labour have threatened to vote against the final agreement we reach with the European Union, the Liberal Democrats have said they want to grind the business of government to a standstill, the S.N.P. say they will vote against the legislation that formally repeals Britain’s membership of the European Union and unelected members of the House of Lords have vowed to fight us every step of the way. Our opponents believe because the government’s majority is so small that our resolve will weaken and that they can force us to change course."
There's no way the 2017 election result can be read as an endorsement of Brexit.
On topic, any delay will show that Brexit is a movable body. It would also cripple the confidence of many Leavers. Everything would feel much more contingent.
In other words, I agree with OGH and it would be a very big moment.
In would also completely neuter the project fear about civil unrest after revocation. Either the extension will happen without disorder, and the bluff will have been called, or there will be disorder, and we'll then be in a position were anything other than a subsequent revocation will be seen as caving in to the mob.
I very much doubt that cancelling Brexit will lead to any serious outbreaks of violence.
Quite what it will do to the public's already low opinion of politicians, and to levels of political engagement and electoral participation, is another matter.
It probably means the death of the Conservative party. I won't say I couldn't see myself voting for them again *ever* but it would be a very, very, very long time before I considered putting my X in that box again. I dare say I'm not the only one.
Death, no. At least, not unless it is replaced by something new, either outright or through schism. A lengthy period in Opposition quite possibly.
It really all depends on how many people continue to cling to them - out of habit, conviction, of fear of the alternative - whether a viable challenger emerges for their core vote, and how well or badly Labour does if it achieves power.
So many imponderables. We might have some idea how the next General Election will pan out the day before it happens, but then again most of us thought we had the last one figured out right up until the moment the exit poll dropped. I'm certainly not prepared to make too many bold assertions about the respective fates of the major parties from the place we're currently in.
On topic, any delay will show that Brexit is a movable body. It would also cripple the confidence of many Leavers. Everything would feel much more contingent.
In other words, I agree with OGH and it would be a very big moment.
In would also completely neuter the project fear about civil unrest after revocation. Either the extension will happen without disorder, and the bluff will have been called, or there will be disorder, and we'll then be in a position were anything other than a subsequent revocation will be seen as caving in to the mob.
I very much doubt that cancelling Brexit will lead to any serious outbreaks of violence.
Quite what it will do to the public's already low opinion of politicians, and to levels of political engagement and electoral participation, is another matter.
Protecting the image of politicians is the worst possible reason for going ahead with Brexit. The national interest comes ahead of the vanity of a few hundred people.
Keeping voter’s faith in democracy is.
Going ahead with this nonsense and damaging the country without a direct mandate would certainly be both undemocratic and undermine voters' faith, once they feel the consequences.
There is both a direct mandate (2016) and an indirect mandate (2017). You just don't like it and so are thrashing around for ways to legitimise your dislike of democracy.
Over 17 million people voted against May's Brexit in 2017. There is no mandate for it at all.
Now William - that is naughty. Both major parties manifestos committed to leaving the EU as you well know. TM deal leaves the EU
If you read the Labour manifesto it is very carefully worded. And, anyhow, the formal position is that we were each electing individuals to represent us, and collectively they don't seem to like either the deal or no deal.
On topic, any delay will show that Brexit is a movable body. It would also cripple the confidence of many Leavers. Everything would feel much more contingent.
In other words, I agree with OGH and it would be a very big moment.
In would also completely neuter the project fear about civil unrest after revocation. Either the extension will happen without disorder, and the bluff will have been called, or there will be disorder, and we'll then be in a position were anything other than a subsequent revocation will be seen as caving in to the mob.
I very much doubt that cancelling Brexit will lead to any serious outbreaks of violence.
Quite what it will do to the public's already low opinion of politicians, and to levels of political engagement and electoral participation, is another matter.
Protecting the image of politicians is the worst possible reason for going ahead with Brexit. The national interest comes ahead of the vanity of a few hundred people.
Keeping voter’s faith in democracy is.
Going ahead with something that the majority of people do not want, or no longer want, just makes a mockery of democracy.
Not if there's mandate for it. Ditching a policy because you think 50% -1 are opposed to it would be a strange way for a government to act.
Active support for May's deal is in the teens. It's nowhere close to 50%-1.
But support for Brexit runs at 46-52%, according to poling taken since the deal was published. And, her deal delivers Brexit.
Her deal is what Brexit means. If people want "Brexit" in abstract but reject its concrete form then they don't really want it.
On topic, any delay will show that Brexit is a movable body. It would also cripple the confidence of many Leavers. Everything would feel much more contingent.
It's a very smart thing to call for because it works for people who genuinely think we need more time to sort something out, but also works for people who just want to remain but are not yet confident enough to just come out and say so yet.
It would be interesting to see polling on whether voters want A50 extended or just to get on with it
I actually disagree, because voters might say they want to just get on with it, but still vehemently oppose anything that is actually proposed to get on with it.
There is both a direct mandate (2016) and an indirect mandate (2017). You just don't like it and so are thrashing around for ways to legitimise your dislike of democracy.
I guess we'll find out on Tuesday just how big May's mandate is...
I find it kind of cute that the very dimmest Brexiteers still haven't figured out that MPs are not delegates, and are not bound by their manifestoes but by their consciences and the effectiveness of the whips.
If you are going to channel Burke then you should remember what the electorate did to him him at the first opportunity after he decided to ignore their wishes.
We now know a sizable majority in the country now wish to remain. I certainly imagine the electorate's revenge to an MP that allowed Brexit to happen when the people have changed their minds would be brutal.
The thought of going into the next election having enabled Magic Grandpa to deliver his unicorn Brexit seems to be weighing particularly heavily on the minds of Labour MPs.
Comments
Matt gets the spirit of the times though:
https://twitter.com/MattCartoonist/status/1083781265764044800?s=19
Teach the electorate their views can be ignored and they'll split between apathy, voting for one mainstream party just because they loathe the other, or going for new (perhaps more extreme) parties.
But this is boring isn't it? Let's just agree to disagree.
In other words, I agree with OGH and it would be a very big moment.
The only reassurances that could have been offered are either no exit without a deal, or significant government support for industry in the event of such an exit. Since the latter would be a potential blank cheque that would cripple the country and flout Tory principles, it inevitably directs back to the former.
But not you, which is my point.
If Parliament hadn't legislated for a plebiscite that contained an option that most MPs didn't think would happen (and, I would venture to suggest, many of them had no intention of implementing even if it did) then we wouldn't be in this mess.
I agree with you that we are out of time for a referendum, even if we could agree a short A50 extension up to the EU elections.
Quite what it will do to the public's already low opinion of politicians, and to levels of political engagement and electoral participation, is another matter.
Also worth remembering that nothing was promised in the referendum about timescale. The PM backed by Parliament triggered A50, and it isn't dishonouring the vote in itself for the same decision makers to extend or revoke, if the stated intention is to progress the process over a longer timescale.
Ratner famously said "some of our products are total crap*". Reputational damage certainly, but like how Brexit has exposed some of our politicians as total crap too, painful because it was true. I also think some of our politicians will come out with enhanced reputations too though, so have quietly lumped on Yvette asnext Lab leader.
*obviously not including Mrs Foxys engagement ring from Tooting Ratners in 1989!
A second referendum could fix this by offering a binding choice between ratification of the withdrawal agreement and revocation of Article 50. Either of those things would immediately discharge the referendum mandate and not constrain any future choices.
If there is a further widespread collapse in confidence following a cancellation of Brexit, then I don't think the main problem will be a far-Right surge - one might very well happen, but not to the extent that it'll get them very far under FPTP - but mass abstention. There's no shortage of people out there who are already deeply sceptical about the value of voting: that cohort can only grow if there's a cast-iron example of their will being thwarted in such a brazen fashion.
So sad and heartfelt condolences to his wife and 3 year old son.
Can anyone believe the remain efforts since the vote haven't been organised in complete alignment with the EU?
Even now very many of them won't vote for the only Brexit plan on offer.
He is running rings round the ERG but still representing a very small part of the conservative mps
Her deal being crap is solely down to her.
Whether that means we must reach a completely new customs agreement, become an associate member of the Customs Union in some way, or remain a signatory to some elements of it, I hold no preconceived position.
If they are that useless and easily led, just as well we didn't rely solely on them to negotiate with the EU, eh?
Closer to the truth is that May has got the least damaging deal she could, in the circumstances. Worse than where we are, but better than going cold turkey. Leavers know it won't deliver the unicorns and are covering their asses rather than taking any responsibility, let alone control.
This Parliament was elected overwhelmingly on an explicit mandate to take the UK out of the EU. Any other result is a complete betrayal.
I do agree he is a grown up serious politician and if ERG had had anyone near his intellect they may have made a better case for their ruinous no deal brexit
Edit: Besides I have not forgotten that a few weeks ago you were the one claiming that democracy was not a good thing.
https://twitter.com/FinancialTimes/status/1083789149986082816
I find it kind of cute that the very dimmest Brexiteers still haven't figured out that MPs are not delegates, and are not bound by their manifestoes but by their consciences and the effectiveness of the whips.
But on the point in question, I am continually amazed that 'old people die' is still used as a trump card argument. There are much better cases to be made, there's no need to go down that route.
I watched some of the debate today in a sparse chamber and genuinely interesting as it was to see views from all areas of the spectrum, not one person said any new thing that hadn't been said - and most of them said that noone had say anything new.
A deal would have been better but with trade no even discussed, no deal is a lot more attractive option than May’s deal.
Which might well end up being true, but I love it when people tally up every vote against the winner of a GE, since all it points out is that tallying up all the options against anything else does even worse.
https://twitter.com/afneil/status/1083750968330727424
But we are, surely, at least getting to the closing point of this phase soon. I was surprised and appalled that the MV was pulled before, mostly since as you say nothing else can occur since they are sticking to very implausible options until it takes place, but they are hopefully reaching a limit now.
Your mandate is what you have the votes for.
"In recent weeks, Labour have threatened to vote against the final agreement we reach with the European Union, the Liberal Democrats have said they want to grind the business of government to a standstill, the S.N.P. say they will vote against the legislation that formally repeals Britain’s membership of the European Union and unelected members of the House of Lords have vowed to fight us every step of the way. Our opponents believe because the government’s majority is so small that our resolve will weaken and that they can force us to change course."
There's no way the 2017 election result can be read as an endorsement of Brexit.
It really all depends on how many people continue to cling to them - out of habit, conviction, of fear of the alternative - whether a viable challenger emerges for their core vote, and how well or badly Labour does if it achieves power.
So many imponderables. We might have some idea how the next General Election will pan out the day before it happens, but then again most of us thought we had the last one figured out right up until the moment the exit poll dropped. I'm certainly not prepared to make too many bold assertions about the respective fates of the major parties from the place we're currently in.
The thought of going into the next election having enabled Magic Grandpa to deliver his unicorn Brexit seems to be weighing particularly heavily on the minds of Labour MPs.