Am I correct in thinking that people on this board now all feel that no-deal is now dead? Because I disagree: I think that if(!) the vote is lost this week then no-deal is entirely possible.
I think No Deal is eminently possible.
Just requires some extraordinary events to stop it.
The sort of events such as those on the front of today’s Sunday Times.
It’s amazing the number of ‘Parliament is Sovereign’ Leavers who are now throwing a strop because it’s resisting Theresa’s vassal-state deal.
Have you read it? I'm guessing from your comment the answer is 'no,' btw.
As far as it relates to the act of withdrawal "May's Deal" isn't vassalage. That's because the future relationship isn't dealt with beyond committing to retain some aspects of what is already there. It's a smart deal in that respect, but it's a bit Jesuitical, really.
On the contrary. It takes us out of CAP, CFP, the CJEU, the Single Market, the Customs Union, the Four Freedoms and the European Political system.
That's pretty extensive with regard to the future relationship.
It's also one reason why everybody is obsessing about this ludicrous backstop - because it's the only stick to beat it with, even though in reality it's a feeble one that the EU certainly wouldn't want to be anything other than temporary.
I agree.
The problem , as one journalist put it, is if you transformed water into wine for the ERG, they'd complain about the vintage.
It’s amazing the number of ‘Parliament is Sovereign’ Leavers who are now throwing a strop because it’s resisting Theresa’s vassal-state deal.
Have you read it? I'm guessing from your comment the answer is 'no,' btw.
As far as it relates to the act of withdrawal "May's Deal" isn't vassalage. That's because the future relationship isn't dealt with beyond committing to retain some aspects of what is already there. It's a smart deal in that respect, but it's a bit Jesuitical, really.
On the contrary. It takes us out of CAP, CFP, the CJEU, the Single Market, the Customs Union, the Four Freedoms and the European Political system.
That's pretty extensive with regard to the future relationship.
It's also one reason why everybody is obsessing about this ludicrous backstop - because it's the only stick to beat it with, even though in reality it's a feeble one that the EU certainly wouldn't want to be anything other than temporary.
It doesn’t preclude any of those things from featuring in the future relationship, and for the first time commmits the UK in writing to the indivisibility of the four freedoms.
It only really became ubiquitous in the 90s after Ford did it in the Escort although some Mercs had it in the 70s. It's still not universal; the 911 didn't get it until the 991 generation in 2002 which is yet another reason why it's the best car in the world.
Didn't some old Jags use to have a filling cap on each side?
Seems like a useful cheap extra manufacturers could add to diffierntiate themselves (until the others all copy) tbh.
Brexit is Global Thermonuclear War off War Games. The only way to win is not to play. The arguments on here and outside in the wider world are stuck in a loop going round and round. The screaming anger is there because remainers ask what does my tattoo say and get the answer "dude" and leavers ask what does my tattoo say and get the answer "sweet". And then the same question again and again and again until the answers are DUDE and SWEET and fisticuffs are imminent.
Brexiteers haven't a sodding clue what they want. Some want to leave the EU but think that a deal where we leave the EU isn't enough because we don't leave the EU properly or something. Some like me wanted Norway. Some wanted WTO and the recreated East India Company. Some wanted the foreigners to go home. Some wanted a job and some more cash for their hospital (presumably to pay to recruit replacements for all the foreigners who just went home)
The ONLY option with any certainty is Remain. We know how that works, what that looks like. Sure, we're going to get yellow vested wazzocks fighting in the streets and several new parties pledging to take back control from that evil parliament who took back control. There'll be protest marches. But we get all of those things whatever we do now.
Would love May to respond to her defeat on Tuesday with "anyone fancy a pint?"
There is no certainty about Remain. At least not if you are being honest. The EU is continually evolving and we have little or no control over how that happens. We already surrendered that control long ago. So you stay in now and in a couple of years the EU has inevitably moved to a position that is unacceptable to the overwhelming majority of people but then it is even more difficult or impossible to leave.
Your suggestion is basically a precursor to violence and an EU civil war.
Brexit is Global Thermonuclear War off War Games. The only way to win is not to play. The arguments on here and outside in the wider world are stuck in a loop going round and round. The screaming anger is there because remainers ask what does my tattoo say and get the answer "dude" and leavers ask what does my tattoo say and get the answer "sweet". And then the same question again and again and again until the answers are DUDE and SWEET and fisticuffs are imminent.
Brexiteers haven't a sodding clue what they want. Some want to leave the EU but think that a deal where we leave the EU isn't enough because we don't leave the EU properly or something. Some like me wanted Norway. Some wanted WTO and the recreated East India Company. Some wanted the foreigners to go home. Some wanted a job and some more cash for their hospital (presumably to pay to recruit replacements for all the foreigners who just went home)
The ONLY option with any certainty is Remain. We know how that works, what that looks like. Sure, we're going to get yellow vested wazzocks fighting in the streets and several new parties pledging to take back control from that evil parliament who took back control. There'll be protest marches. But we get all of those things whatever we do now.
Would love May to respond to her defeat on Tuesday with "anyone fancy a pint?"
There is no certainty about Remain. At least not if you are being honest. The EU is continually evolving and we have little or no control over how that happens. We already surrendered that control long ago. So you stay in now and in a couple of years the EU has inevitably moved to a position that is unacceptable to the overwhelming majority of people but then it is even more difficult or impossible to leave.
Your suggestion is basically a precursor to violence and an EU civil war.
It’s utterly banal to argue that Remain is uncertain. It says nothing more than that the future is unknown.
It only really became ubiquitous in the 90s after Ford did it in the Escort although some Mercs had it in the 70s. It's still not universal; the 911 didn't get it until the 991 generation in 2002 which is yet another reason why it's the best car in the world.
Didn't some old Jags use to have a filling cap on each side?
Lots of cars did. eg Aston V8 and Lotus Esprit.
Minis issued to British forces (and mk.2 Coopers) had twin fillers and twin tanks. I once rolled one over during a backwards reverse gear only race around the dispersal at an RAF base in Yorkshire the exact location of which remains classified. We pulled the wreckage into the fire dump and blamed visiting ATC cadets.
It’s amazing the number of ‘Parliament is Sovereign’ Leavers who are now throwing a strop because it’s resisting Theresa’s vassal-state deal.
Have you read it? I'm guessing from your comment the answer is 'no,' btw.
As far as it relates to the act of withdrawal "May's Deal" isn't vassalage. That's because the future relationship isn't dealt with beyond committing to retain some aspects of what is already there. It's a smart deal in that respect, but it's a bit Jesuitical, really.
On the contrary. It takes us out of CAP, CFP, the CJEU, the Single Market, the Customs Union, the Four Freedoms and the European Political system.
That's pretty extensive with regard to the future relationship.
It's also one reason why everybody is obsessing about this ludicrous backstop - because it's the only stick to beat it with, even though in reality it's a feeble one that the EU certainly wouldn't want to be anything other than temporary.
It doesn’t preclude any of those things from featuring in the future relationship, and for the first time commmits the UK in writing to the indivisibility of the four freedoms.
We were already committed to the indivisibility of the four freedoms under the previous treaties we signed. For as long as we stayed in the EEA of course.
It’s amazing the number of ‘Parliament is Sovereign’ Leavers who are now throwing a strop because it’s resisting Theresa’s vassal-state deal.
Have you read it? I'm guessing from your comment the answer is 'no,' btw.
As far as it relates to the act of withdrawal "May's Deal" isn't vassalage. That's because the future relationship isn't dealt with beyond committing to retain some aspects of what is already there. It's a smart deal in that respect, but it's a bit Jesuitical, really.
On the contrary. It takes us out of CAP, CFP, the CJEU, the Single Market, the Customs Union, the Four Freedoms and the European Political system.
That's pretty extensive with regard to the future relationship.
It's also one reason why everybody is obsessing about this ludicrous backstop - because it's the only stick to beat it with, even though in reality it's a feeble one that the EU certainly wouldn't want to be anything other than temporary.
I agree.
The problem , as one journalist put it, is if you transformed water into wine for the ERG, they'd complain about the vintage.
Very well put.
Both sides unknowingly feed off each other. I suspect more Remainers than would admit know the deal isn't vassalage or anything close, but they know such rhetoric is as far as most ERG analysis goes and have every interest in pouring fuel onto that fire.
I'm beginning to suspect the prospect of No Deal will be enough to persuade a number of arch-Remainer Tories to support Labour in a VoNC.
Some, like Ken Clarke, have little to lose and I suspect there are a few others who are probably already planning alternate careers in the light of deselection threats arising from their actions to date. Those who believe No Deal is going to be a catastrophe may well feel bringing down the Government is a price worth paying to avoid that outcome.
Brexit is Global Thermonuclear War off War Games. The only way to win is not to play. The arguments on here and outside in the wider world are stuck in a loop going round and round. The screaming anger is there because remainers ask what does my tattoo say and get the answer "dude" and leavers ask what does my tattoo say and get the answer "sweet". And then the same question again and again and again until the answers are DUDE and SWEET and fisticuffs are imminent.
Brexiteers haven't a sodding clue what they want. Some want to leave the EU but think that a deal where we leave the EU isn't enough because we don't leave the EU properly or something. Some like me wanted Norway. Some wanted WTO and the recreated East India Company. Some wanted the foreigners to go home. Some wanted a job and some more cash for their hospital (presumably to pay to recruit replacements for all the foreigners who just went home)
The ONLY option with any certainty is Remain. We know how that works, what that looks like. Sure, we're going to get yellow vested wazzocks fighting in the streets and several new parties pledging to take back control from that evil parliament who took back control. There'll be protest marches. But we get all of those things whatever we do now.
Would love May to respond to her defeat on Tuesday with "anyone fancy a pint?"
There is no certainty about Remain. At least not if you are being honest. The EU is continually evolving and we have little or no control over how that happens. We already surrendered that control long ago. So you stay in now and in a couple of years the EU has inevitably moved to a position that is unacceptable to the overwhelming majority of people but then it is even more difficult or impossible to leave.
Your suggestion is basically a precursor to violence and an EU civil war.
It’s utterly banal to argue that Remain is uncertain. It says nothing more than that the future is unknown.
Nope. It says that the claims that we can stay in the EU and nothing will change are dishonest. And of course that was the whole basis of the Remain campaign
I'm beginning to suspect the prospect of No Deal will be enough to persuade a number of arch-Remainer Tories to support Labour in a VoNC.
Some, like Ken Clarke, have little to lose and I suspect there are a few others who are probably already planning alternate careers in the light of deselection threats arising from their actions to date. Those who believe No Deal is going to be a catastrophe may well feel bringing down the Government is a price worth paying to avoid that outcome.
That's a bad example.
Ken Clarke isn't on my wing of the party but he's a solid loyal Conservative through and through and would never vote to put Corbyn into office.
It’s amazing the number of ‘Parliament is Sovereign’ Leavers who are now throwing a strop because it’s resisting Theresa’s vassal-state deal.
Have you read it? I'm guessing from your comment the answer is 'no,' btw.
As far as it relates to the act of withdrawal "May's Deal" isn't vassalage. That's because the future relationship isn't dealt with beyond committing to retain some aspects of what is already there. It's a smart deal in that respect, but it's a bit Jesuitical, really.
On the contrary. It takes us out of CAP, CFP, the CJEU, the Single Market, the Customs Union, the Four Freedoms and the European Political system.
That's pretty extensive with regard to the future relationship.
It's also one reason why everybody is obsessing about this ludicrous backstop - because it's the only stick to beat it with, even though in reality it's a feeble one that the EU certainly wouldn't want to be anything other than temporary.
I agree.
The problem , as one journalist put it, is if you transformed water into wine for the ERG, they'd complain about the vintage.
Very well put.
Both sides unknowingly feed off each other. I suspect more Remainers than would admit know the deal isn't vassalage or anything close, but they know such rhetoric is as far as most ERG analysis goes and have every interest in pouring fuel onto that fire.
I think a few Remainer Tory MPs see a chance for Remain if the Deal is defeated, so they will vote against. It's nothing to do with 'vassalage'; they (and most Remainers) see any Brexit as worse than staying.
I'm beginning to suspect the prospect of No Deal will be enough to persuade a number of arch-Remainer Tories to support Labour in a VoNC.
Some, like Ken Clarke, have little to lose and I suspect there are a few others who are probably already planning alternate careers in the light of deselection threats arising from their actions to date. Those who believe No Deal is going to be a catastrophe may well feel bringing down the Government is a price worth paying to avoid that outcome.
Clarke won't bring down the Government. That is not to say others would not to prevent Brexit but it won't be Clarke.
I'm beginning to suspect the prospect of No Deal will be enough to persuade a number of arch-Remainer Tories to support Labour in a VoNC.
Some, like Ken Clarke, have little to lose and I suspect there are a few others who are probably already planning alternate careers in the light of deselection threats arising from their actions to date. Those who believe No Deal is going to be a catastrophe may well feel bringing down the Government is a price worth paying to avoid that outcome.
That's a bad example.
Ken Clarke isn't on my wing of the party but he's a solid loyal Conservative through and through and would never vote to put Corbyn into office.
Maybe Ken's not the best example but my point still stands.
A VoNC wouldn't might put Corbyn in office but not in power - at least not in a way that would allow him to implement anything particularly socialist, it would need a GE and a Labour win for that.
That's a nice bit of whataboutism that excuses any political action that a Remain advocate might wish to take.
The implications of a democratic referendum mandate never being implemented in this country are very serious for the long term health of our society and democracy, and will make themselves felt from Day One.
Am I correct in thinking that people on this board now all feel that no-deal is now dead? Because I disagree: I think that if(!) the vote is lost this week then no-deal is entirely possible.
I put it at 5% and shrinking fast. My current odds:
May’s Deal unamended 5% May’s Deal amended (eg Norway) 50% May’s Deal with a Referendum 35% Revoke with no vote 5% No Deal 5%
I put the odds of a near term GE at 30%. I put the odds of a voluntary May resignation at 20%. I put the odds of a successful VONC at 5%.
It’s amazing the number of ‘Parliament is Sovereign’ Leavers who are now throwing a strop because it’s resisting Theresa’s vassal-state deal.
Have you read it? I'm guessing from your comment the answer is 'no,' btw.
As far as it relates to the act of withdrawal "May's Deal" isn't vassalage. That's because the future relationship isn't dealt with beyond committing to retain some aspects of what is already there. It's a smart deal in that respect, but it's a bit Jesuitical, really.
On the contrary. It takes us out of CAP, CFP, the CJEU, the Single Market, the Customs Union, the Four Freedoms and the European Political system.
That's pretty extensive with regard to the future relationship.
It's also one reason why everybody is obsessing about this ludicrous backstop - because it's the only stick to beat it with, even though in reality it's a feeble one that the EU certainly wouldn't want to be anything other than temporary.
I agree.
The problem , as one journalist put it, is if you transformed water into wine for the ERG, they'd complain about the vintage.
Very well put.
Both sides unknowingly feed off each other. I suspect more Remainers than would admit know the deal isn't vassalage or anything close, but they know such rhetoric is as far as most ERG analysis goes and have every interest in pouring fuel onto that fire.
I think a few Remainer Tory MPs see a chance for Remain if the Deal is defeated, so they will vote against. It's nothing to do with 'vassalage'; they (and most Remainers) see any Brexit as worse than staying.
Indeed, but my tool is that it's useful rhetoric for them to more fool the arch-Leavers.
It’s amazing the number of ‘Parliament is Sovereign’ Leavers who are now throwing a strop because it’s resisting Theresa’s vassal-state deal.
Have you read it? I'm guessing from your comment the answer is 'no,' btw.
As far as it relates to the act of withdrawal "May's Deal" isn't vassalage. That's because the future relationship isn't dealt with beyond committing to retain some aspects of what is already there. It's a smart deal in that respect, but it's a bit Jesuitical, really.
On the contrary. It takes us out of CAP, CFP, the CJEU, the Single Market, the Customs Union, the Four Freedoms and the European Political system.
That's pretty extensive with regard to the future relationship.
It's also one reason why everybody is obsessing about this ludicrous backstop - because it's the only stick to beat it with, even though in reality it's a feeble one that the EU certainly wouldn't want to be anything other than temporary.
It doesn’t preclude any of those things from featuring in the future relationship, and for the first time commmits the UK in writing to the indivisibility of the four freedoms.
We were already committed to the indivisibility of the four freedoms under the previous treaties we signed. For as long as we stayed in the EEA of course.
There’s a subtle difference between being signatories of a treaty that contains the four freedoms and being signatories of a treaty that says that the four freedoms are indivisible.
I'm beginning to suspect the prospect of No Deal will be enough to persuade a number of arch-Remainer Tories to support Labour in a VoNC.
Some, like Ken Clarke, have little to lose and I suspect there are a few others who are probably already planning alternate careers in the light of deselection threats arising from their actions to date. Those who believe No Deal is going to be a catastrophe may well feel bringing down the Government is a price worth paying to avoid that outcome.
Not one of your more likely posts. Ken Clarke is voting for the deal and would never vote against his party in a vnoc.
Furthermore, we leave with no deal on tne 29th March so I do not understand how a GE could even bring any resolution to no deal or indeed anything else
The best bet for remain is a referendum but neither TM or JC will support the legislation for one, unless enforced on them by the HOC
Grieve may resign the whip but as the main architect of the referendum he is more likely to stay in the party and use all his skills to get what he wants, though it may not be what the country wants
And finally, the thought of Corbyn to any conservative mp is a very sobering one
Of the Probables/Possibles on Con Home's list, I'd expect Selous, Halfon, Swire, Hayes, Elphicke to end up voting for it. Penning is definitely against. I"m not sure why Lee, Soubry, or Wollaston are put in that category as they are certainly against.
To be fair, as we've seen on EU mattters before, Wollaston can turn on a dime.....
Remain-supporting Conservative MPs are not a substantial problem for the Prime Minister right now.
They are if you believe today’s Sunday Times. I can’t see May agreeing that Grieve isn’t a major problem.
They're a problem. They're not the biggest problem.
They are unreliable. Till win the election.
I agree with you on p to them.
It'd be closer with leave support, possibly enough with some labour rebels. They don't have to do that, but they can hardly complain if they take action which means remainers end up with more numbers.
Except that it’s a hugely Remain dominated HoC which is why, despite my personal preference, I don’t believe Brexit will happen. If there was common ground, it would have been found by now.
Remain it is.
Are you a masochist? You seem very enthusiastic that your referendum vote will be vetoed without a democratic figleaf. I personally don’t think our politicians would do it. They haven’t got the testicular fortitude.
We will probably vote again. It will be a circus, but without the fun.
I don't think I could bear that.
You just need a different mindset. British politics will be shifting from Barber’s Toccata Festiva to Stravinsky’s Rite of Spring. Both can be enjoyable, but not in the same way as the Messiah.
If Parliament revokes unilaterally, we’re into Messiaen territory.
It’s amazing the number of ‘Parliament is Sovereign’ Leavers who are now throwing a strop because it’s resisting Theresa’s vassal-state deal.
Have you read it? I'm guessing from your comment the answer is 'no,' btw.
As far as it relates to the act of withdrawal "May's Deal" isn't vassalage. That's because the future relationship isn't dealt with beyond committing to retain some aspects of what is already there. It's a smart deal in that respect, but it's a bit Jesuitical, really.
On the contrary. It takes us out of CAP, CFP, the CJEU, the Single Market, the Customs Union, the Four Freedoms and the European Political system.
That's pretty extensive with regard to the future relationship.
It's also one reason why everybody is obsessing about this ludicrous backstop - because it's the only stick to beat it with, even though in reality it's a feeble one that the EU certainly wouldn't want to be anything other than temporary.
It doesn’t preclude any of those things from featuring in the future relationship, and for the first time commmits the UK in writing to the indivisibility of the four freedoms.
We were already committed to the indivisibility of the four freedoms under the previous treaties we signed. For as long as we stayed in the EEA of course.
There’s a subtle difference between being signatories of a treaty that contains the four freedoms and being signatories of a treaty that says that the four freedoms are indivisible.
In practice there is no difference at all - except for the obvious one that we would be outside the four freedoms rather than inside.
That's a nice bit of whataboutism that excuses any political action that a Remain advocate might wish to take.
The implications of a democratic referendum mandate never being implemented in this country are very serious for the long term health of our society and democracy, and will make themselves felt from Day One.
Which is why it would be sensible to have a further referendum now we know what leaving actually looks like.
Am I correct in thinking that people on this board now all feel that no-deal is now dead? Because I disagree: I think that if(!) the vote is lost this week then no-deal is entirely possible.
I put it at 5% and shrinking fast. My current odds:
May’s Deal unamended 5% May’s Deal amended (eg Norway) 50% May’s Deal with a Referendum 35% Revoke with no vote 5% No Deal 5%
I put the odds of a near term GE at 30%. I put the odds of a voluntary May resignation at 20%. I put the odds of a successful VONC at 5%.
Do you genuinely believe there is only a 5% chance that Brexit will be reversed? If so I think you are my new best friend.
It’s amazing the number of ‘Parliament is Sovereign’ Leavers who are now throwing a strop because it’s resisting Theresa’s vassal-state deal.
Have you read it? I'm guessing from your comment the answer is 'no,' btw.
As far as it relates to the act of withdrawal "May's Deal" isn't vassalage. That's because the future relationship isn't dealt with beyond committing to retain some aspects of what is already there. It's a smart deal in that respect, but it's a bit Jesuitical, really.
On the contrary. It takes us out of CAP, CFP, the CJEU, the Single Market, the Customs Union, the Four Freedoms and the European Political system.
That's pretty extensive with regard to the future relationship.
It's also one reason why everybody is obsessing about this ludicrous backstop - because it's the only stick to beat it with, even though in reality it's a feeble one that the EU certainly wouldn't want to be anything other than temporary.
It doesn’t preclude any of those things from featuring in the future relationship, and for the first time commmits the UK in writing to the indivisibility of the four freedoms.
We were already committed to the indivisibility of the four freedoms under the previous treaties we signed. For as long as we stayed in the EEA of course.
There’s a subtle difference between being signatories of a treaty that contains the four freedoms and being signatories of a treaty that says that the four freedoms are indivisible.
In practice there is no difference at all - except for the obvious one that we would be outside the four freedoms rather than inside.
The future relationship hasn’t been negotiated yet, but we are signing up to negotiating guidelines that heavily bind us if we want frictionless trade across two politically-sensitive borders.
Am I correct in thinking that people on this board now all feel that no-deal is now dead? Because I disagree: I think that if(!) the vote is lost this week then no-deal is entirely possible.
I put it at 5% and shrinking fast. My current odds:
May’s Deal unamended 5% May’s Deal amended (eg Norway) 50% May’s Deal with a Referendum 35% Revoke with no vote 5% No Deal 5%
I put the odds of a near term GE at 30%. I put the odds of a voluntary May resignation at 20%. I put the odds of a successful VONC at 5%.
Do you genuinely believe there is only a 5% chance that Brexit will be reversed? If so I think you are my new best friend.
No, I think there is a 35% chance of Parliament voting for May’s deal SUBJECT to a referendum. And I put Remain’s chances in a referendum at 50%
So I think there is a 5% + 17.5% chance of Remain (and a 77.5% chance of Brexit).
Am I correct in thinking that people on this board now all feel that no-deal is now dead? Because I disagree: I think that if(!) the vote is lost this week then no-deal is entirely possible.
I put it at 5% and shrinking fast. My current odds:
May’s Deal unamended 5% May’s Deal amended (eg Norway) 50% May’s Deal with a Referendum 35% Revoke with no vote 5% No Deal 5%
I put the odds of a near term GE at 30%. I put the odds of a voluntary May resignation at 20%. I put the odds of a successful VONC at 5%.
Do you genuinely believe there is only a 5% chance that Brexit will be reversed? If so I think you are my new best friend.
I'd probably estimate 40% no Brexit, 30% each for No Deal and May's deal (more or less ).
I'm beginning to suspect the prospect of No Deal will be enough to persuade a number of arch-Remainer Tories to support Labour in a VoNC.
Some, like Ken Clarke, have little to lose and I suspect there are a few others who are probably already planning alternate careers in the light of deselection threats arising from their actions to date. Those who believe No Deal is going to be a catastrophe may well feel bringing down the Government is a price worth paying to avoid that outcome.
Not one of your more likely posts. Ken Clarke is voting for the deal and would never vote against his party in a vnoc.
Furthermore, we leave with no deal on tne 29th March so I do not understand how a GE could even bring any resolution to no deal or indeed anything else
The best bet for remain is a referendum but neither TM or JC will support the legislation for one, unless enforced on them by the HOC
Grieve may resign the whip but as the main architect of the referendum he is more likely to stay in the party and use all his skills to get what he wants, though it may not be what the country wants
And finally, the thought of Corbyn to any conservative mp is a very sobering one
I sort of answered this earlier in response to Casino.
A VoNC doesn't need to lead to a GE, and even if it does, there is a window of opportunity for an A50 extension or revocation before the GE.
Without a GE a Corbyn-led minority government would be toothless, so not much to fear. We might come across that rare and exotic beast a GNU, led be Grieve or Clarke say.
Am I correct in thinking that people on this board now all feel that no-deal is now dead? Because I disagree: I think that if(!) the vote is lost this week then no-deal is entirely possible.
I put it at 5% and shrinking fast. My current odds:
May’s Deal unamended 5% May’s Deal amended (eg Norway) 50% May’s Deal with a Referendum 35% Revoke with no vote 5% No Deal 5%
I put the odds of a near term GE at 30%. I put the odds of a voluntary May resignation at 20%. I put the odds of a successful VONC at 5%.
Do you genuinely believe there is only a 5% chance that Brexit will be reversed? If so I think you are my new best friend.
I'd probably estimate 40% no Brexit, 30% each for No Deal and May's deal (more or less ).
I like Gardenwalker better. I want to be in his gang.
Brexit is Global Thermonuclear War off War Games. The only way to win is not to play. The arguments on here and outside in the wider world are stuck in a loop going round and round. The screaming anger is there because remainers ask what does my tattoo say and get the answer "dude" and leavers ask what does my tattoo say and get the answer "sweet". And then the same question again and again and again until the answers are DUDE and SWEET and fisticuffs are imminent.
Brexiteers haven't a sodding clue what they want. Some want to leave the EU but think that a deal where we leave the EU isn't enough because we don't leave the EU properly or something. Some like me wanted Norway. Some wanted WTO and the recreated East India Company. Some wanted the foreigners to go home. Some wanted a job and some more cash for their hospital (presumably to pay to recruit replacements for all the foreigners who just went home)
The ONLY option with any certainty is Remain. We know how that works, what that looks like. Sure, we're going to get yellow vested wazzocks fighting in the streets and several new parties pledging to take back control from that evil parliament who took back control. There'll be protest marches. But we get all of those things whatever we do now.
Would love May to respond to her defeat on Tuesday with "anyone fancy a pint?"
There is no certainty about Remain. At least not if you are being honest. The EU is continually evolving and we have little or no control over how that happens. We already surrendered that control long ago. So you stay in now and in a couple of years the EU has inevitably moved to a position that is unacceptable to the overwhelming majority of people but then it is even more difficult or impossible to leave.
Your suggestion is basically a precursor to violence and an EU civil war.
It’s utterly banal to argue that Remain is uncertain. It says nothing more than that the future is unknown.
Nope. It says that the claims that we can stay in the EU and nothing will change are dishonest. And of course that was the whole basis of the Remain campaign
William was right and you and I both know it. We know precisely what to expect if we pull Article 50 because it's identical to what we had before we invoked it. We don't know precisely or even generally what to expect if we go out because we are still arguing over what we want.
I know that you and others don't really care what happens because the prize is leaving as a moral principle. A good friend of mine makes the same argument. The rest of us would quite like to know what is on the other side of the doorway before we step through
It’s amazing the number of ‘Parliament is Sovereign’ Leavers who are now throwing a strop because it’s resisting Theresa’s vassal-state deal.
Have you read it? I'm guessing from your comment the answer is 'no,' btw.
As far as it relates to the act of withdrawal "May's Deal" isn't vassalage. That's because the future relationship isn't dealt with beyond committing to retain some aspects of what is already there. It's a smart deal in that respect, but it's a bit Jesuitical, really.
On the contrary. It takes us out of CAP, CFP, the CJEU, the Single Market, the Customs Union, the Four Freedoms and the European Political system.
That's pretty extensive with regard to the future relationship.
It's also one reason why everybody is obsessing about this ludicrous backstop - because it's the only stick to beat it with, even though in reality it's a feeble one that the EU certainly wouldn't want to be anything other than temporary.
It doesn’t preclude any of those things from featuring in the future relationship, and for the first time commmits the UK in writing to the indivisibility of the four freedoms.
We were already committed to the indivisibility of the four freedoms under the previous treaties we signed. For as long as we stayed in the EEA of course.
There’s a subtle difference between being signatories of a treaty that contains the four freedoms and being signatories of a treaty that says that the four freedoms are indivisible.
In practice there is no difference at all - except for the obvious one that we would be outside the four freedoms rather than inside.
The future relationship hasn’t been negotiated yet, but we are signing up to negotiating guidelines that heavily bind us if we want frictionless trade across two politically-sensitive borders.
That is another matter entirely apart from the four freedoms. Since we will not (unfortunately) move on FoM by your own logic we will not be in the Four Freedoms. In a way the EU have shot themselves in the foot over this. They have limited the amount of pressure they can put on us in trade talks by already excluding a close relationship.
Am I correct in thinking that people on this board now all feel that no-deal is now dead? Because I disagree: I think that if(!) the vote is lost this week then no-deal is entirely possible.
I put it at 5% and shrinking fast. My current odds:
May’s Deal unamended 5% May’s Deal amended (eg Norway) 50% May’s Deal with a Referendum 35% Revoke with no vote 5% No Deal 5%
I put the odds of a near term GE at 30%. I put the odds of a voluntary May resignation at 20%. I put the odds of a successful VONC at 5%.
Do you genuinely believe there is only a 5% chance that Brexit will be reversed? If so I think you are my new best friend.
No, I think there is a 35% chance of Parliament voting for May’s deal SUBJECT to a referendum. And I put Remain’s chances in a referendum at 50%
So I think there is a 5% + 17.5% chance of Remain (and a 77.5% chance of Brexit).
Closer to 5% than 22.5% IMO. The constitutional catastrophe of now remaining before discharging the mandate is just too obvious. Plus both TM and JC are equally determined to leave.
Whereas it seems to me the possibility of us deciding during a lengthy transition period to have a rethink is being underestimated. There would be time, there would be new leadership and it could be properly said to be a legitimate political aim as no decision binds its successors.
Am I correct in thinking that people on this board now all feel that no-deal is now dead? Because I disagree: I think that if(!) the vote is lost this week then no-deal is entirely possible.
I put it at 5% and shrinking fast. My current odds:
May’s Deal unamended 5% May’s Deal amended (eg Norway) 50% May’s Deal with a Referendum 35% Revoke with no vote 5% No Deal 5%
I put the odds of a near term GE at 30%. I put the odds of a voluntary May resignation at 20%. I put the odds of a successful VONC at 5%.
Do you genuinely believe there is only a 5% chance that Brexit will be reversed? If so I think you are my new best friend.
I'd probably estimate 40% no Brexit, 30% each for No Deal and May's deal (more or less ).
Brexit is Global Thermonuclear War off War Games. The only way to win is not to play. The arguments on here and outside in the wider world are stuck in a loop going round and round. The screaming anger is there because remainers ask what does my tattoo say and get the answer "dude" and leavers ask what does my tattoo say and get the answer "sweet". And then the same question again and again and again until the answers are DUDE and SWEET and fisticuffs are imminent.
Brexiteers haven't a sodding clue what they want. Some want to leave the EU but think that a deal where we leave the EU isn't enough because we don't leave the EU properly or something. Some like me wanted Norway. Some wanted WTO and the recreated East India Company. Some wanted the foreigners to go home. Some wanted a job and some more cash for their hospital
The ONLY option with any certainty is Remain. We know how that works, what that looks like. Sure, we're going to get yellow vested wazzocks fighting in the streets and several new parties pledging to take back control from that evil parliament who took back control. There'll be protest marches. But we get all of those things whatever we do now.
Would love May to respond to her defeat on Tuesday with "anyone fancy a pint?"
There is no certainty about Remain. At least not if you are being honest. The EU is continually evolving and we have little or no control over how that happens. We already surrendered that control long ago. So you stay in now and in a couple of years the EU has inevitably moved to a position that is unacceptable to the overwhelming majority of people but then it is even more difficult or impossible to leave.
Your suggestion is basically a precursor to violence and an EU civil war.
It’s utterly banal to argue that Remain is uncertain. It says nothing more than that the future is unknown.
Nope. It says that the claims that we can stay in the EU and nothing will change are dishonest. And of course that was the whole basis of the Remain campaign
William was right and you and I both know it. We know precisely what to expect if we pull Article 50 because it's identical to what we had before we invoked it. We don't know precisely or even generally what to expect if we go out because we are still arguing over what we want.
I know that you and others don't really care what happens because the prize is leaving as a moral principle. A good friend of mine makes the same argument. The rest of us would quite like to know what is on the other side of the doorway before we step through
It seems unlikely to me that revoking A50 would result in the status quo ante.
That's a nice bit of whataboutism that excuses any political action that a Remain advocate might wish to take.
The implications of a democratic referendum mandate never being implemented in this country are very serious for the long term health of our society and democracy, and will make themselves felt from Day One.
Which is why it would be sensible to have a further referendum now we know what leaving actually looks like.
No, Leave looks like exactly what it should look like given the referendum result.
A second referendum is just a device to give Remain another free hit.
That's a nice bit of whataboutism that excuses any political action that a Remain advocate might wish to take.
The implications of a democratic referendum mandate never being implemented in this country are very serious for the long term health of our society and democracy, and will make themselves felt from Day One.
Which is why it would be sensible to have a further referendum now we know what leaving actually looks like.
No, Leave looks like exactly what it should look like given the referendum result.
A second referendum is just a device to give Remain another free hit.
Well, as I have said before, I would reluctantly support May's Deal personally given the referendum, but hard-line Leave MPs are scuppering it.
I'm beginning to suspect the prospect of No Deal will be enough to persuade a number of arch-Remainer Tories to support Labour in a VoNC.
Some, like Ken Clarke, have little to lose and I suspect there are a few others who are probably already planning alternate careers in the light of deselection threats arising from their actions to date. Those who believe No Deal is going to be a catastrophe may well feel bringing down the Government is a price worth paying to avoid that outcome.
Not one of your more likely posts. Ken Clarke is voting for the deal and would never vote against his party in a vnoc.
Furthermore, we leave with no deal on tne 29th March so I do not understand how a GE could even bring any resolution to no deal or indeed anything else
The best bet for remain is a referendum but neither TM or JC will support the legislation for one, unless enforced on them by the HOC
Grieve may resign the whip but as the main architect of the referendum he is more likely to stay in the party and use all his skills to get what he wants, though it may not be what the country wants
And finally, the thought of Corbyn to any conservative mp is a very sobering one
I sort of answered this earlier in response to Casino.
A VoNC doesn't need to lead to a GE, and even if it does, there is a window of opportunity for an A50 extension or revocation before the GE.
Without a GE a Corbyn-led minority government would be toothless, so not much to fear. We might come across that rare and exotic beast a GNU, led be Grieve or Clarke say.
To be a GNU it needs politicians from both sides to work together in the country's interest
It’s amazing the number of ‘Parliament is Sovereign’ Leavers who are now throwing a strop because it’s resisting Theresa’s vassal-state deal.
Have you read it? I'm guessing from your comment the answer is 'no,' btw.
As far as it relates to the act of withdrawal "May's Deal" isn't vassalage. That's because the future relationship isn't dealt with beyond committing to retain some aspects of what is already there. It's a smart deal in that respect, but it's a bit Jesuitical, really.
On the contrary. It takes us out of CAP, CFP, the CJEU, the Single Market, the Customs Union, the Four Freedoms and the European Political system.
That's pretty extensive with regard to the future relationship.
It's also one reason why everybody is obsessing about this ludicrous backstop - because it's the only stick to beat it with, even though in reality it's a feeble one that the EU certainly wouldn't want to be anything other than temporary.
It doesn’t preclude any of those things from featuring in the future relationship, and for the first time commmits the UK in writing to the indivisibility of the four freedoms.
We were already committed to the indivisibility of the four freedoms under the previous treaties we signed. For as long as we stayed in the EEA of course.
There’s a subtle difference between being signatories of a treaty that contains the four freedoms and being signatories of a treaty that says that the four freedoms are indivisible.
In practice there is no difference at all - except for the obvious one that we would be outside the four freedoms rather than inside.
The future relationship hasn’t been negotiated yet, but we are signing up to negotiating guidelines that heavily bind us if we want frictionless trade across two politically-sensitive borders.
That is another matter entirely apart from the four freedoms. Since we will not (unfortunately) move on FoM by your own logic we will not be in the Four Freedoms. In a way the EU have shot themselves in the foot over this. They have limited the amount of pressure they can put on us in trade talks by already excluding a close relationship.
We will move on FoM. It becomes less politically toxic by the day.
I'm beginning to suspect the prospect of No Deal will be enough to persuade a number of arch-Remainer Tories to support Labour in a VoNC.
It is possible that Brexit has driven one or two of them so mad that they would actually No Confidence their own government but if they did they wouldn't be able to stand for Con in any future election as they'd been cast out of the Party.
That's a nice bit of whataboutism that excuses any political action that a Remain advocate might wish to take.
The implications of a democratic referendum mandate never being implemented in this country are very serious for the long term health of our society and democracy, and will make themselves felt from Day One.
Which is why it would be sensible to have a further referendum now we know what leaving actually looks like.
No, Leave looks like exactly what it should look like given the referendum result.
A second referendum is just a device to give Remain another free hit.
Well, as I have said before, I would reluctantly support May's Deal personally given the referendum, but hard-line Leave MPs are scuppering it.
I don't believe 52% voted for No Deal.
I am absolutely certain 52% did not vote for no deal. The irony is that if the brexiteers had been offered TM deal at the time of the referendum they would have been delighted
They have now become gready and irrational and are likely to lose brexit all on their own
I'm beginning to suspect the prospect of No Deal will be enough to persuade a number of arch-Remainer Tories to support Labour in a VoNC.
It is possible that Brexit has driven one or two of them so mad that they would actually No Confidence their own government but if they did they wouldn't be able to stand for Con in any future election as they'd been cast out of the Party.
More likely Theresa May stepping down would be enough for Conservatives to save face, and support HMG in a confidence vote.
It’s amazing the number of ‘Parliament is Sovereign’ Leavers who are now throwing a strop because it’s resisting Theresa’s vassal-state deal.
Have you read it? I'm guessing from your comment the answer is 'no,' btw.
As far as it relates to the act of withdrawal "May's Deal" isn't vassalage. That's because the future relationship isn't dealt with beyond committing to retain some aspects of what is already there. It's a smart deal in that respect, but it's a bit Jesuitical, really.
On the contrary. It takes us out of CAP, CFP, the CJEU, the Single Market, the Customs Union, the Four Freedoms and the European Political system.
That's pretty extensive with regard to the future relationship.
It's also one reason why everybody is obsessing about this ludicrous backstop - because it's the only stick to beat it with, even though in reality it's a feeble one that the EU certainly wouldn't want to be anything other than temporary.
I expect to be bound by a greater or lesser extent on all those institutions. Nevertheless the deal is silent on them because it relates to withdrawal and a two year extension and not the future state. There is no arrangement within the deal for market access for UK fish or agricultural products, except a still to be defined customs agreement as part of the Irish backstop. Everything else remains to be negotiated and will at least be under the indirect guidance of the CJEU.
It’s amazing the number of ‘Parliament is Sovereign’ Leavers who are now throwing a strop because it’s resisting Theresa’s vassal-state deal.
Have you read it? I'm guessing from your comment the answer is 'no,' btw.
As far as it relates to the act of withdrawal "May's Deal" isn't vassalage. That's because the future relationship isn't dealt with beyond committing to retain some aspects of what is already there. It's a smart deal in that respect, but it's a bit Jesuitical, really.
On the contrary. It takes us out of CAP, CFP, the CJEU, the Single Market, the Customs Union, the Four Freedoms and the European Political system.
That's pretty extensive with regard to the future relationship.
It's also one reason why everybody is obsessing about this ludicrous backstop - because it's the only stick to beat it with, even though in reality it's a feeble one that the EU certainly wouldn't want to be anything other than temporary.
It doesn’t preclude any of those things from featuring in the future relationship, and for the first time commmits the UK in writing to the indivisibility of the four freedoms.
We were already committed to the indivisibility of the four freedoms under the previous treaties we signed. For as long as we stayed in the EEA of course.
There’s a subtle difference between being signatories of a treaty that contains the four freedoms and being signatories of a treaty that says that the four freedoms are indivisible.
In practice there is no difference at all - except for the obvious one that we would be outside the four freedoms rather than inside.
The future relationship hasn’t been negotiated yet, but we are signing up to negotiating guidelines that heavily bind us if we want frictionless trade across two politically-sensitive borders.
That is another matter entirely apart from the four freedoms. Since we will not (unfortunately) move on FoM by your own logic we will not be in the Four Freedoms. In a way the EU have shot themselves in the foot over this. They have limited the amount of pressure they can put on us in trade talks by already excluding a close relationship.
We will move on FoM. It becomes less politically toxic by the day.
Until we actually move on it. No one should want the immigration apartheid required by FOM
No other manager for United, including Busby and Ferguson, have won their first six games
It's an omen for Remain. United have their mojo back and Remain is going to win in the end.
United have after all always been very pro Europe :-)
Or maybe a 'Norway' deal.
I was there when Ole scored in the Camp Nou (May 1999) and it topped nearly 50 years supporting the club with the treble, the only English club to achieve the feat.
I'm beginning to suspect the prospect of No Deal will be enough to persuade a number of arch-Remainer Tories to support Labour in a VoNC.
It is possible that Brexit has driven one or two of them so mad that they would actually No Confidence their own government but if they did they wouldn't be able to stand for Con in any future election as they'd been cast out of the Party.
More likely Theresa May stepping down would be enough for Conservatives to save face, and support HMG in a confidence vote.
ERG have already said they’ll support her. They oppose her deal not her Gov. same with the DUP it’s the hardcore Remainers who want to seize control of Gov she has to worry about.
Apparently the ERG have said they’ll even support her deal if she commits to stand down by 30th June. Not sure I believe that but certainly read it.
Am I correct in thinking that people on this board now all feel that no-deal is now dead? Because I disagree: I think that if(!) the vote is lost this week then no-deal is entirely possible.
Entirely possible. I'm pretty sure we won't like No Deal if we get it and there will be a scramble to agree something, anything, to get out of it.
It’s amazing the number of ‘Parliament is Sovereign’ Leavers who are now throwing a strop because it’s resisting Theresa’s vassal-state deal.
Have you read it? I'm guessing from your comment the answer is 'no,' btw.
As far as it relates to the act of withdrawal "May's Deal" isn't vassalage. That's because the future relationship isn't dealt with beyond committing to retain some aspects of what is already there. It's a smart deal in that respect, but it's a bit Jesuitical, really.
On the contrary. It takes us out of CAP, CFP, the CJEU, the Single Market, the Customs Union, the Four Freedoms and the European Political system.
That's pretty extensive with regard to the future relationship.
It's also one reason why everybody is obsessing about this ludicrous backstop - because it's the only stick to beat it with, even though in reality it's a feeble one that the EU certainly wouldn't want to be anything other than temporary.
It doesn’t preclude any of those things from featuring in the future relationship, and for the first time commmits the UK in writing to the indivisibility of the four freedoms.
We were already committed to the indivisibility of the four freedoms under the previous treaties we signed. For as long as we stayed in the EEA of course.
There’s a signatories of a treaty that contains the four freedoms and being signatories of a treaty that says that the four freedoms are indivisible.
In practic at all - except for the obvious one that we would be outside the four freedoms rather than inside.
The future relationship hasn’t been negotiated yet, but we are signing up to negotiating guidelines that heavily bind us if we want frictionless trade across two politically-sensitive borders.
That is another matter entirely apart from the four freedoms. Since we will not (unfortunately) move on FoM by your own logic we will not be in the Four Freedoms. In a way the EU have put on us in trade talks by already excluding a close relationship.
We will move on FoM. It becomes less politically toxic by the day.
Until we actually move on it. No one should want the immigration apartheid required by FOM
There is no apartheid in reciprocal free movement and this kind of rhetoric shames anyone who employs it.
That's a nice bit of whataboutism that excuses any political action that a Remain advocate might wish to take.
The implications of a democratic referendum mandate never being implemented in this country are very serious for the long term health of our society and democracy, and will make themselves felt from Day One.
One thing is for sure, never again will a government be able to fob off troublesome campaigns with a referendum (like Nats, voting reform etc.) as people will know that the word of the government is worthless, when Parliament can stop the "wrong" result.
It’s amazing the number of ‘Parliament is Sovereign’ Leavers who are now throwing a strop because it’s resisting Theresa’s vassal-state deal.
Have you read it? I'm guessing from your comment the answer is 'no,' btw.
As far as it relates to the act of withdrawal "May's Deal" isn't vassalage. That's because the future relationship isn't dealt with beyond committing to retain some aspects of what is already there. It's a smart deal in that respect, but it's a bit Jesuitical, really.
On the contrary. It takes us out of CAP, CFP, the CJEU, the Single Market, the Customs Union, the Four Freedoms and the European Political system.
It doesn’t preclude any of those things from featuring in the future relationship, and for the first time commmits the UK in writing to the indivisibility of the four freedoms.
We were already committed to the indivisibility of the four freedoms under the previous treaties we signed. For as long as we stayed in the EEA of course.
There’s a signatories of a treaty that contains the four freedoms and being signatories of a treaty that says that the four freedoms are indivisible.
In practic at all - except for the obvious one that we would be outside the four freedoms rather than inside.
The future relationship hasn’t been negotiated yet, but we are signing up to negotiating guidelines that heavily bind us if we want frictionless trade across two politically-sensitive borders.
That is another matter entirely apart from the four freedoms. Since we will not (unfortunately) move on FoM by your own logic we will not be in the Four Freedoms. In a way the EU have put on us in trade talks by already excluding a close relationship.
We will move on FoM. It becomes less politically toxic by the day.
Until we actually move on it. No one should want the immigration apartheid required by FOM
There is no apartheid in reciprocal free movement and this kind of rhetoric shames anyone who employs it.
Of course FOM involves I,migration apartheid. It requires us to have a different immigration system for those outside the EU. The only shame is being so blindly devoted to the EU as not to recognise it.
It’s amazing the number of ‘Parliament is Sovereign’ Leavers who are now throwing a strop because it’s resisting Theresa’s vassal-state deal.
Have you read it? I'm guessing from your comment the answer is 'no,' btw.
As far as it relates to the act of withdrawal "May's Deal" isn't vassalage. That's because the future relationship isn't dealt with beyond committing to retain some aspects of what is already there. It's a smart deal in that respect, but it's a bit Jesuitical, really.
On the contrary. It takes us out of CAP, CFP, the CJEU, the Single Market, the Customs Union, the Four Freedoms and the European Political system.
It doesn’t precl freedoms.
We were already committed to the indivisibility of the four freedoms under the previous treaties we signed. For as long as we stayed in the EEA of course.
There’s a signatories of a treaty that contains the four freedoms and being signatories of a treaty that says that the four freedoms are indivisible.
In practic at all - except for the obvious one that we would be outside the four freedoms rather than inside.
The future relationship hasn’t been negotiated yet, but we are signing up to negotiating guidelines that heavily bind us if we want frictionless trade across two politically-sensitive borders.
That is another matter entirely apart from the four freedoms. Since we will not (unfortunately) move on FoM by your own logic we will not be in the Four Freedoms. In a way the EU have put on us in trade talks by already excluding a close relationship.
We will move on FoM. It becomes less politically toxic by the day.
Until we actually move on it. No one should want the immigration apartheid required by FOM
There is no apartheid in reciprocal free movement and this kind of rhetoric shames anyone who employs it.
Of course FOM involves I,migration apartheid. It requires us to have a different immigration system for those outside the EU. The only shame is being so blindly devoted to the EU as not to recognise it.
Nothing in the EU treaties prevents us having free movement with Australia.
Brexit is Global Thermonuclear War off War Games. The only way to win is not to play. The arguments on here and outside in the wider world are stuck in a loop going round and round. The screaming anger is there because remainers ask what does my tattoo say and get the answer "dude" and leavers ask what does my tattoo say and get the answer "sweet". And then the same question again and again and again until the answers are DUDE and SWEET and fisticuffs are imminent.
B The ONLY option with any certainty is Remain. We know how that works, what that looks like. Sure, we're going to get yellow vested wazzocks fighting in the streets and several new parties pledging to take back control from that evil parliament who took back control. There'll be protest marches. But we get all of those things whatever we do now.
Would love May to respond to her defeat on Tuesday with "anyone fancy a pint?"
There is no certainty about Remain. At least not if you are being honest. The EU is continually evolving and we have little or no control over how that happens. We already surrendered that control long ago. So you stay in now and in a couple of years the EU has inevitably moved to a position that is unacceptable to the overwhelming majority of people but then it is even more difficult or impossible to leave.
Your suggestion is basically a precursor to violence and an EU civil war.
It’s utterly banal to argue that Remain is uncertain. It says nothing more than that the future is unknown.
Nope. It says that the claims that we can stay in the EU and nothing will change are dishonest. And of course that was the whole basis of the Remain campaign
William was right and you and I both know it. We know precisely what to expect if we pull Article 50 because it's identical to what we had before we invoked it. We don't know precisely or even generally what to expect if we go out because we are still arguing over what we want.
I know that you and others don't really care what happens because the prize is leaving as a moral principle. A good friend of mine makes the same argument. The rest of us would quite like to know what is on the other side of the doorway before we step through
It seems unlikely to me that revoking A50 would result in the status quo ante.
Most likely, we'd get the counter revolution and a push for further European integration as europhiles believed they scuppered euroscepticism and won for good.
It’s amazing the number of ‘Parliament is Sovereign’ Leavers who are now throwing a strop because it’s resisting Theresa’s vassal-state deal.
Have you read it? I'm guessing from your comment the answer is 'no,' btw.
As far as it relates to the act of withdrawal "May's Deal" isn't vassalage. That's because the future relationship isn't dealt with beyond committing to retain some aspects of what is already there. It's a smart deal in that respect, but it's a bit Jesuitical, really.
On the contrary. It takes us out of CAP, CFP, the CJEU, the Single Market, the Customs Union, the Four Freedoms and the European Political system.
It doesn’t precl freedoms.
.
There’s a signatories of a treaty that contains the four freedoms and being signatories of a treaty that says that the four freedoms are indivisible.
In practic at all - except for the obvious one that we would be outside the four freedoms rather than inside.
The future relationship hasn’t been negotiated yet, but we are signing up to negotiating guidelines that heavily bind us if we want frictionless trade across two politically-sensitive borders.
That is another matter entirely apart from the four freedoms. Since we will not (unfortunately) move on FoM by your own logic we will not be in the Four Freedoms. In a way the EU have put on us in trade talks by already excluding a close relationship.
We will move on FoM. It becomes less politically toxic by the day.
Until we actually move on it. No one should want the immigration apartheid required by FOM
There is no apartheid in reciprocal free movement and this kind of rhetoric shames anyone who employs it.
Of course FOM involves I,migration apartheid. It requires us to have a different immigration system for those outside the EU. The only shame is being so blindly devoted to the EU as not to recognise it.
Nothing in the EU treaties prevents us having free movement with Australia.
It’s amazing the number of ‘Parliament is Sovereign’ Leavers who are now throwing a strop because it’s resisting Theresa’s vassal-state deal.
Have you read it? I'm guessing from your comment the answer is 'no,' btw.
As far as it relates to the act of withdrawal "May's Deal" isn't vassalage. That's because the future relationship isn't dealt with beyond committing to retain some aspects of what is already there. It's a smart deal in that respect, but it's a bit Jesuitical, really.
On the contrary. It takes us out of CAP, CFP, the CJEU, the Single Market, the Customs Union, the Four Freedoms and the European Political system.
It doesn’t precl freedoms.
.
There’s a signatories of a treaty that contains the four freedoms and being signatories of a treaty that says that the four freedoms are indivisible.
In practic at all - except for the obvious one that we would be outside the four freedoms rather than inside.
The future relationship hasn’t been negotiated yet, but we are signing up to negotiating guidelines that heavily bind us if we want frictionless trade across two politically-sensitive borders.
That is another matter entirely apart from the four freedoms. Since we will not (unfortunately) move on FoM by your own logic we will not be in the Four Freedoms. In a way the EU have put on us in trade talks by already excluding a close relationship.
We will move on FoM. It becomes less politically toxic by the day.
Until we actually move on it. No one should want the immigration apartheid required by FOM
There is no apartheid in reciprocal free movement and this kind of rhetoric shames anyone who employs it.
Of course FOM involves I,migration apartheid. It requires us to have a different immigration system for those outside the EU. The only shame is being so blindly devoted to the EU as not to recognise it.
Nothing in the EU treaties prevents us having free movement with Australia.
Except the Australians
Thank you for conceding the point. I hope you won’t repeat it.
That's a nice bit of whataboutism that excuses any political action that a Remain advocate might wish to take.
The implications of a democratic referendum mandate never being implemented in this country are very serious for the long term health of our society and democracy, and will make themselves felt from Day One.
One thing is for sure, never again will a government be able to fob off troublesome campaigns with a referendum (like Nats, voting reform etc.) as people will know that the word of the government is worthless, when Parliament can stop the "wrong" result.
Nobody was going to start dicking about with referendums any time soon anyway. Cameron treated the Premiership like the Claremont Club. Three gambles - small win, bigger win, career defining loss. No way to do it - that's clear now.
It’s amazing the number of ‘Parliament is Sovereign’ Leavers who are now throwing a strop because it’s resisting Theresa’s vassal-state deal.
Have you read it? I'm guessing from your comment the answer is 'no,' btw.
As far as it relates to the act of withdrawal "May's Deal" isn't vassalage. That's because the future relationship isn't dealt with beyond committing to retain some aspects of what is already there. It's a smart deal in that respect, but it's a bit Jesuitical, really.
On the contrary. It takes us out of CAP, CFP, the CJEU, the Single Market, the Customs Union, the Four Freedoms and the European Political system.
It doesn’t precl freedoms.
.
There’s a signatories of a treaty that contains the four freedoms and being signatories of a treaty that says that the four freedoms are indivisible.
In practic at all - except for the obvious one that we would be outside the four freedoms rather than inside.
We will move on FoM. It becomes less politically toxic by the day.
Until we actually move on it. No one should want the immigration apartheid required by FOM
There is no apartheid in reciprocal free movement and this kind of rhetoric shames anyone who employs it.
Of course FOM involves I,migration apartheid. It requires us to have a different immigration system for those outside the EU. The only shame is being so blindly devoted to the EU as not to recognise it.
Nothing in the EU treaties prevents us having free movement with Australia.
Except the Australians
Thank you for conceding the point. I hope you won’t repeat it.
I haven’t. Your point, if that is what is it, is barking. No nation state gives up its right to set immigration procedures except EU members with other EU members - which is immigration apartheid.
It’s amazing the number of ‘Parliament is Sovereign’ Leavers who are now throwing a strop because it’s resisting Theresa’s vassal-state deal.
Have you read it? I'm guessing from your comment the answer is 'no,' btw.
As far as it relates to the act of withdrawal "May's Deal" isn't vassalage. That's because the future relationship isn't dealt with beyond committing to retain some aspects of what is already there. It's a smart deal in that respect, but it's a bit Jesuitical, really.
On the contrary. It takes us out of CAP, CFP, the CJEU, the Single Market, the Customs Union, the Four Freedoms and the European Political system.
It doesn’t precl freedoms.
.
There’s a signatories of a treaty that contains the four freedoms and being signatories of a treaty that says that the four freedoms are indivisible.
In practic at all - except for the obvious one that we would be outside the four freedoms rather than inside.
We will move on FoM. It becomes less politically toxic by the day.
Until we actually move on it. No one should want the immigration apartheid required by FOM
There is no apartheid in reciprocal free movement and this kind of rhetoric shames anyone who employs it.
Of course FOM involves I,migration apartheid. It requires us to have a different immigration system for those outside the EU. The only shame is being so blindly devoted to the EU as not to recognise it.
Nothing in the EU treaties prevents us having free movement with Australia.
Except the Australians
Thank you for conceding the point. I hope you won’t repeat it.
I haven’t. Your point, if that is what is it, is barking. No nation state gives up its right to set immigration procedures except EU members with other EU members - which is immigration apartheid.
If I understand you correctly, our immigration policy for places like Australia, India, Canada etc would be the same whether in the EU or not.
1. Theresa May decides that the only way she can get a deal through Parliament is with Labour support.
2. May goes back to the EU and renegotiates a WA with a permanent customs union
3. May puts the new WA to the vote, Labour vote against it because it doesn't pass their six tests. Tories, furious at May's betrayal, vote against it.
4. New WA defeated by a far larger numbers than than the backstop WA.
That's a nice bit of whataboutism that excuses any political action that a Remain advocate might wish to take.
The implications of a democratic referendum mandate never being implemented in this country are very serious for the long term health of our society and democracy, and will make themselves felt from Day One.
Anyone who chooses a course of action because far right wingers with a collective IQ of 7 might or might not do this or that is a coward.
Am I correct in thinking that people on this board now all feel that no-deal is now dead? Because I disagree: I think that if(!) the vote is lost this week then no-deal is entirely possible.
Entirely possible. I'm pretty sure we won't like No Deal if we get it and there will be a scramble to agree something, anything, to get out of it.
Yes, and the things to be agreed at the beginning would be a financial settlement, and the Irish backstop...
That's a nice bit of whataboutism that excuses any political action that a Remain advocate might wish to take.
The implications of a democratic referendum mandate never being implemented in this country are very serious for the long term health of our society and democracy, and will make themselves felt from Day One.
Which is why it would be sensible to have a further referendum now we know what leaving actually looks like.
No, Leave looks like exactly what it should look like given the referendum result.
A second referendum is just a device to give Remain another free hit.
Well, as I have said before, I would reluctantly support May's Deal personally given the referendum, but hard-line Leave MPs are scuppering it.
I don't believe 52% voted for No Deal.
I am absolutely certain 52% did not vote for no deal. The irony is that if the brexiteers had been offered TM deal at the time of the referendum they would have been delighted
They have now become gready and irrational and are likely to lose brexit all on their own
Politics hey !!!!!
And if the Remainers had been offered Norway plus a CU fudge they would have jumped at it, but May went all "red lines" and "citizens of nowhere".
I'm beginning to suspect the prospect of No Deal will be enough to persuade a number of arch-Remainer Tories to support Labour in a VoNC.
Some, like Ken Clarke, have little to lose and I suspect there are a few others who are probably already planning alternate careers in the light of deselection threats arising from their actions to date. Those who believe No Deal is going to be a catastrophe may well feel bringing down the Government is a price worth paying to avoid that outcome.
Ken Clarke will *never* vote to put a socialist throwback into power
It’s amazing the number of ‘Parliament is Sovereign’ Leavers who are now throwing a strop because it’s resisting Theresa’s vassal-state deal.
Have you read it? I'm guessing from your comment the answer is 'no,' btw.
.
It doesn’t precl freedoms.
.
There’s a signatories of a treaty that contains the four freedoms and being signatories of a treaty that says that the four freedoms are indivisible.
In practic at all - except for the obvious one that we would be outside the four freedoms rather than inside.
We will move on FoM. It becomes less politically toxic by the day.
Until we actually move on it. No one should want the immigration apartheid required by FOM
There is no apartheid in reciprocal free movement and this kind of rhetoric shames anyone who employs it.
Of course FOM involves I,migration apartheid. It requires us to have a different immigration system for those outside the EU. The only shame is being so blindly devoted to the EU as not to recognise it.
.
Except the Australians
Thank you for conceding the point. I hope you won’t repeat it.
I haven’t. Your point, if that is what is it, is barking. No nation state gives up its right to set immigration procedures except EU members with other EU members - which is immigration apartheid.
If I understand you correctly, our immigration policy for places like Australia, India, Canada etc would be the same whether in the EU or not.
Not really and certainly not what Javid is trying to do. Outside the EU we would have one immigration system for all which is transparently a way of treating g would be immigrants on the same basis and on the basis of merit. Places like Australia, India, Canada etc face more onerous immigration criteria than might otherwise be the case because we have preference to EU immigrants as an EU member.
1. Theresa May decides that the only way she can get a deal through Parliament is with Labour support.
2. May goes back to the EU and renegotiates a WA with a permanent customs union
3. May puts the new WA to the vote, Labour vote against it because it doesn't pass their six tests. Tories, furious at May's betrayal, vote against it.
4. New WA defeated by a far larger numbers than than the backstop WA.
That is against everything she said and I just cannot see it
IMHO TM will lose on Tuesday and then the amendments and support for them will colour her judgment on the way forward
Am I correct in thinking that people on this board now all feel that no-deal is now dead? Because I disagree: I think that if(!) the vote is lost this week then no-deal is entirely possible.
I put it at 5% and shrinking fast. My current odds:
May’s Deal unamended 5% May’s Deal amended (eg Norway) 50% May’s Deal with a Referendum 35% Revoke with no vote 5% No Deal 5%
I put the odds of a near term GE at 30%. I put the odds of a voluntary May resignation at 20%. I put the odds of a successful VONC at 5%.
Do you genuinely believe there is only a 5% chance that Brexit will be reversed? If so I think you are my new best friend.
No, I think there is a 35% chance of Parliament voting for May’s deal SUBJECT to a referendum. And I put Remain’s chances in a referendum at 50%
So I think there is a 5% + 17.5% chance of Remain (and a 77.5% chance of Brexit).
That's consistent with the Betfair odds of no Brexit before 2022. That is a 26% probability. I guess this includes a long drawn out transition period that goes beyond end 2021.
Betfair also has the chance of a referendum this year of 38% (cf your 35%). If there is a referendum, I put the chance of Remain winning at 70% but there isn't a market for this yet.
Am I correct in thinking that people on this board now all feel that no-deal is now dead? Because I disagree: I think that if(!) the vote is lost this week then no-deal is entirely possible.
Entirely possible. I'm pretty sure we won't like No Deal if we get it and there will be a scramble to agree something, anything, to get out of it.
That is why it shouldn't be described as "No Deal". "Deal Still to be Agreed" would be more accurate, whether it turns out to be comprehensive free trade deal or something that falls short of that.
The UK's negotiating position would also be far stronger in negotiating that deal if we have left before it is agreed. There would be no point from the EU's point of view in continuing to offer next to nothing at its own expense in the hope that the UK would have second thoughts about leaving. Instead, the EU would for the first time have to deal in the reality of making something work that had already happened.
I'm beginning to suspect the prospect of No Deal will be enough to persuade a number of arch-Remainer Tories to support Labour in a VoNC.
Some, like Ken Clarke, have little to lose and I suspect there are a few others who are probably already planning alternate careers in the light of deselection threats arising from their actions to date. Those who believe No Deal is going to be a catastrophe may well feel bringing down the Government is a price worth paying to avoid that outcome.
Ken Clarke will *never* vote to put a socialist throwback into power
Clarke is prepared, despite his ultra remain status, to vote for the deal to avoid no deal, so in other words has compromised. What about Grieve and the others? Either no deal is super bad or it isn't. If it is bad but not as bad as the opposition getting into power then those crying about it really are making too much of a fuss and undermining everyone who suggests we need a new vote to avoid it.
That's a nice bit of whataboutism that excuses any political action that a Remain advocate might wish to take.
The implications of a democratic referendum mandate never being implemented in this country are very serious for the long term health of our society and democracy, and will make themselves felt from Day One.
Which is why it would be sensible to have a further referendum now we know what leaving actually looks like.
No, Leave looks like exactly what it should look like given the referendum result.
A second referendum is just a device to give Remain another free hit.
Well, as I have said before, I would reluctantly support May's Deal personally given the referendum, but hard-line Leave MPs are scuppering it.
I don't believe 52% voted for No Deal.
I am absolutely certain 52% did not vote for no deal. The irony is that if the brexiteers had been offered TM deal at the time of the referendum they would have been delighted
They have now become gready and irrational and are likely to lose brexit all on their own
Politics hey !!!!!
And if the Remainers had been offered Norway plus a CU fudge they would have jumped at it, but May went all "red lines" and "citizens of nowhere".
But the ERG and most remainers would reject it. Norway is worse than TM deal
Most brexiteets want no deal, most remainers want to remain, and the way the maths are I suspect remain are just favourites at present
1. Theresa May decides that the only way she can get a deal through Parliament is with Labour support.
2. May goes back to the EU and renegotiates a WA with a permanent customs union
3. May puts the new WA to the vote, Labour vote against it because it doesn't pass their six tests. Tories, furious at May's betrayal, vote against it.
4. New WA defeated by a far larger numbers than than the backstop WA.
It doesn’t really matter what May says is her Plan B if the amendment allows MPs to put forward their own plans on an equal basis as the Gov’s to be voted on in the same binding manner.
Rumours circulating in Twitterland of at least 5 Tory PPSes planning to resign and vote against the deal.
The only new name I’ve seen bruited who has not previously come out against is Tom Pursglove. If he comes out against, this sucker is going dahn bigstyle - he’d positioned himself till now very astutely to be able to vote for the deal with a heavy heart when required. If he’s not doing that, the defeat is likely to be bigger than anticipated.
Am I correct in thinking that people on this board now all feel that no-deal is now dead? Because I disagree: I think that if(!) the vote is lost this week then no-deal is entirely possible.
I think the chances of it decreased quite a bit, but it is not yet dead. On the ropes though, remain are almost there.
Am I correct in thinking that people on this board now all feel that no-deal is now dead? Because I disagree: I think that if(!) the vote is lost this week then no-deal is entirely possible.
Entirely possible. I'm pretty sure we won't like No Deal if we get it and there will be a scramble to agree something, anything, to get out of it.
That is why it shouldn't be described as "No Deal". "Deal Still to be Agreed" would be more accurate
The parrot shouldn't be described as "dead". It should be described as "yet to be ressurected".
Rumours circulating in Twitterland of at least 5 Tory PPSes planning to resign and vote against the deal.
The only new name I’ve seen bruited who has not previously come out against is Tom Pursglove. If he comes out against, this sucker is going dahn bigstyle - he’d positioned himself till now very astutely to be able to vote for the deal with a heavy heart when required. If he’s not doing that, the defeat is likely to be bigger than anticipated.
It's being anticipated to be 150+ at least isn't it? The most optimistic I've seen was *around* 100 and many well over 200. How much bigger could it possibly get?
If I understand you correctly, our immigration policy for places like Australia, India, Canada etc would be the same whether in the EU or not.
Not really and certainly not what Javid is trying to do. Outside the EU we would have one immigration system for all which is transparently a way of treating g would be immigrants on the same basis and on the basis of merit. Places like Australia, India, Canada etc face more onerous immigration criteria than might otherwise be the case because we have preference to EU immigrants as an EU member.
Also, in contrast to the UK, Canada is free to adopt a quite liberal approach to asylum seekers because it has effective tools in place to manage economic migration in the interests of its people. The UK's position is the reverse.
A Grand Strategy borrowed from the 18th century: honours for votes.
And we have the nerve to criticise Italian politicians!
John Redwood got a knighthood. If votes are being bought with honours it is doing a very poor job of it, and has bought off less than a handful in a vote to be lost by hundreds. Is it plausible?
Rumours circulating in Twitterland of at least 5 Tory PPSes planning to resign and vote against the deal.
The only new name I’ve seen bruited who has not previously come out against is Tom Pursglove. If he comes out against, this sucker is going dahn bigstyle - he’d positioned himself till now very astutely to be able to vote for the deal with a heavy heart when required. If he’s not doing that, the defeat is likely to be bigger than anticipated.
What is the chance of Mrs May pulling the vote for another month? There has to be a point as Brexit day closes in when blind panic really would take over and the deal would pass.
Rumours circulating in Twitterland of at least 5 Tory PPSes planning to resign and vote against the deal.
The only new name I’ve seen bruited who has not previously come out against is Tom Pursglove. If he comes out against, this sucker is going dahn bigstyle - he’d positioned himself till now very astutely to be able to vote for the deal with a heavy heart when required. If he’s not doing that, the defeat is likely to be bigger than anticipated.
My sense is it’s going down, all the way to Chinatown.
Any idea what time the Deal gets mullered on Tuesday? I doubt I'll be able to watch it live, but as many as can should do so, it will be a moment of history to see the first formal step toward us remaining.
Rumours circulating in Twitterland of at least 5 Tory PPSes planning to resign and vote against the deal.
The only new name I’ve seen bruited who has not previously come out against is Tom Pursglove. If he comes out against, this sucker is going dahn bigstyle - he’d positioned himself till now very astutely to be able to vote for the deal with a heavy heart when required. If he’s not doing that, the defeat is likely to be bigger than anticipated.
What is the chance of Mrs May pulling the vote for another month? There has to be a point as Brexit day closes in when blind panic really would take over and the deal would pass.
Rumours circulating in Twitterland of at least 5 Tory PPSes planning to resign and vote against the deal.
The only new name I’ve seen bruited who has not previously come out against is Tom Pursglove. If he comes out against, this sucker is going dahn bigstyle - he’d positioned himself till now very astutely to be able to vote for the deal with a heavy heart when required. If he’s not doing that, the defeat is likely to be bigger than anticipated.
It's being anticipated to be 150+ at least isn't it? The most optimistic I've seen was *around* 100 and many well over 200. How much bigger could it possibly get?
He ranks about number 120 on my list of potential rebels. That implies just over 200 voting for the deal, so going down by more than 200.
I count another 13 Conservative MPs still unconfirmed. I’d assumed they’d all vote for the deal but that assumption now looks unsafe.
Any idea what time the Deal gets mullered on Tuesday? I doubt I'll be able to watch it live, but as many as can should do so, it will be a moment of history to see the first formal step toward us remaining.
Division is expected to be called at 10pm with the result due at circa 10.15pm.
However this may move if more amendments are accepted.
1. Theresa May decides that the only way she can get a deal through Parliament is with Labour support.
2. May goes back to the EU and renegotiates a WA with a permanent customs union
3. May puts the new WA to the vote, Labour vote against it because it doesn't pass their six tests. Tories, furious at May's betrayal, vote against it.
4. New WA defeated by a far larger numbers than than the backstop WA.
It doesn’t really matter what May says is her Plan B if the amendment allows MPs to put forward their own plans on an equal basis as the Gov’s to be voted on in the same binding manner.
If May wants the Deal passed, then all she needs to do is to make acceptance conditional on winning a #Peoplesvote. It would pass with a three figure majority. Simples.
Comments
Just requires some extraordinary events to stop it.
The sort of events such as those on the front of today’s Sunday Times.
The problem , as one journalist put it, is if you transformed water into wine for the ERG, they'd complain about the vintage.
Seems like a useful cheap extra manufacturers could add to diffierntiate themselves (until the others all copy) tbh.
Your suggestion is basically a precursor to violence and an EU civil war.
Minis issued to British forces (and mk.2 Coopers) had twin fillers and twin tanks. I once rolled one over during a backwards reverse gear only race around the dispersal at an RAF base in Yorkshire the exact location of which remains classified. We pulled the wreckage into the fire dump and blamed visiting ATC cadets.
Both sides unknowingly feed off each other. I suspect more Remainers than would admit know the deal isn't vassalage or anything close, but they know such rhetoric is as far as most ERG analysis goes and have every interest in pouring fuel onto that fire.
Some, like Ken Clarke, have little to lose and I suspect there are a few others who are probably already planning alternate careers in the light of deselection threats arising from their actions to date. Those who believe No Deal is going to be a catastrophe may well feel bringing down the Government is a price worth paying to avoid that outcome.
Ken Clarke isn't on my wing of the party but he's a solid loyal Conservative through and through and would never vote to put Corbyn into office.
A VoNC wouldn't might put Corbyn in office but not in power - at least not in a way that would allow him to implement anything particularly socialist, it would need a GE and a Labour win for that.
The implications of a democratic referendum mandate never being implemented in this country are very serious for the long term health of our society and democracy, and will make themselves felt from Day One.
My current odds:
May’s Deal unamended 5%
May’s Deal amended (eg Norway) 50%
May’s Deal with a Referendum 35%
Revoke with no vote 5%
No Deal 5%
I put the odds of a near term GE at 30%.
I put the odds of a voluntary May resignation at 20%.
I put the odds of a successful VONC at 5%.
I presume with all this EU anti-federalism in prospect you would now like the UK to stay in and help drive it forward?
Furthermore, we leave with no deal on tne 29th March so I do not understand how a GE could even bring any resolution to no deal or indeed anything else
The best bet for remain is a referendum but neither TM or JC will support the legislation for one, unless enforced on them by the HOC
Grieve may resign the whip but as the main architect of the referendum he is more likely to stay in the party and use all his skills to get what he wants, though it may not be what the country wants
And finally, the thought of Corbyn to any conservative mp is a very sobering one
I think that's one for les oiseaux
So I think there is a 5% + 17.5% chance of Remain (and a 77.5% chance of Brexit).
My trusty Zafira doesn't have this helpful function so I just have to guess.
A VoNC doesn't need to lead to a GE, and even if it does, there is a window of opportunity for an A50 extension or revocation before the GE.
Without a GE a Corbyn-led minority government would be toothless, so not much to fear. We might come across that rare and exotic beast a GNU, led be Grieve or Clarke say.
I know that you and others don't really care what happens because the prize is leaving as a moral principle. A good friend of mine makes the same argument. The rest of us would quite like to know what is on the other side of the doorway before we step through
Closer to 5% than 22.5% IMO. The constitutional catastrophe of now remaining before discharging the mandate is just too obvious. Plus both TM and JC are equally determined to leave.
Whereas it seems to me the possibility of us deciding during a lengthy transition period to have a rethink is being underestimated. There would be time, there would be new leadership and it could be properly said to be a legitimate political aim as no decision binds its successors.
A second referendum is just a device to give Remain another free hit.
I don't believe 52% voted for No Deal.
They have now become gready and irrational and are likely to lose brexit all on their own
Politics hey !!!!!
United have after all always been very pro Europe :-)
I was there when Ole scored in the Camp Nou (May 1999) and it topped nearly 50 years supporting the club with the treble, the only English club to achieve the feat.
Apparently the ERG have said they’ll even support her deal if she commits to stand down by 30th June. Not sure I believe that but certainly read it.
It can be quite hazardous towing large numbers of people with a quad bike.
1. Theresa May decides that the only way she can get a deal through Parliament is with Labour support.
2. May goes back to the EU and renegotiates a WA with a permanent customs union
3. May puts the new WA to the vote, Labour vote against it because it doesn't pass their six tests. Tories, furious at May's betrayal, vote against it.
4. New WA defeated by a far larger numbers than than the backstop WA.
IMHO TM will lose on Tuesday and then the amendments and support for them will colour her judgment on the way forward
Betfair also has the chance of a referendum this year of 38% (cf your 35%). If there is a referendum, I put the chance of Remain winning at 70% but there isn't a market for this yet.
The UK's negotiating position would also be far stronger in negotiating that deal if we have left before it is agreed. There would be no point from the EU's point of view in continuing to offer next to nothing at its own expense in the hope that the UK would have second thoughts about leaving. Instead, the EU would for the first time have to deal in the reality of making something work that had already happened.
Most brexiteets want no deal, most remainers want to remain, and the way the maths are I suspect remain are just favourites at present
But, we shall see.
I count another 13 Conservative MPs still unconfirmed. I’d assumed they’d all vote for the deal but that assumption now looks unsafe.
However this may move if more amendments are accepted.