Starting to push the line that a PM who defies constitutional convention and refuses to resign when she’s manifestly lost the confidence of Parliament is in no position to protest about other deviations from constitutional norms.
There’s only one way to test the confidence of the house these days.
Strictly, isn’t the only change that losing a vote on a money bill is no longer a confidence matter? Which i think was only a matter of convention anyway. As I understnad it, the FTPA explained how an election could be called and what counted as a successful VONC, but it didn’t say anything about the conventions under which a government would feel bound to resign. May’s neglect of those conventions is her choice, not a change mandated in legislation.
Starting to push the line that a PM who defies constitutional convention and refuses to resign when she’s manifestly lost the confidence of Parliament is in no position to protest about other deviations from constitutional norms.
She has not lost a vote of no confidence. I'm a fan of not defying convention without a good reason, but statute setting out that only explicit such votes count would seem to trump that it used to be so that x was the case. She would not be deviating from the norm because current law supersedes the old way, it's not just making up new ways of doing things.
If there were really a tidal wave of support for her Mps would not be so implacably opposed. No, more likely people are sympathetic but that's it.
I think there could be more to it than that.
I can't prove this - there is as yet no reliable polling on it - but I sense that the public have started to really focus on the contents of the Withdrawal Treaty now, and in particular the Backstop. I think they might even be reading it.
Assuming there is a political imperative for no border in Ireland, all that the Backstop does is turn that political imperative into a legal commitment - is what is perhaps striking them.
Therefore, if the Backstop is as heinous a problem as is being made out, it implies that the political imperative is not an imperative but merely an aspiration.
And given that the public realize that it IS an imperative, they could be beginning to conclude that much of the bile directed against the Backstop, and thus against the Withdrawal Treaty, is entirely without reasonable justification.
Just a trickle of this line of thinking at the moment, perhaps, but it could soon be a flood.
I don't think there's a wave of enthusiasm for the Deal. More that there a lot of people who think it's okay, not bad, can live with it, and feel some sympathy for the PM.
She has absolutely no room to manoeuvre if those 5 prove correct which means she is more of a lame duck than she is now. If she doesn’t resign, she has two immediate problems - staving off defeat in a VONC and trying to keep control of the political agenda.
She is certainly in a tight corner. Hence the tidal wave of support for her amongst ordinary decent people. The British people, particularly decent ordinary ones, tend to rally to the cause of someone who is in a tight corner. History is littered with examples of that.
The public understand the stress that Mrs May is under. They are no doubt aware of the copious research which shows that the most unpleasant of all positions in the workplace is that of hapless middle-manager caught between the devil of a capricious and unyielding boss (EU) and the deep blue sea of a bunch of unruly miscreants (MPs) whom one is technically responsible for managing. They can relate to this, ordinary people can, and it breaks their hearts to see their Prime Minister in such a place.
Still, all very well, but it is hard to see the relevance of this to the likely margin of defeat tomorrow. Looks like it is going to be a rather heavy one.
I am sure May is under a lot of stress but that is because she failed to build support even though she lacks a majority. She only has herself to blame for that.
If she is not going to resign and she is not going to give up her deal, a GE seems the only way for her to proceed, even though she’s already said she’ll resign before the next one.
The DUP have just said that they will support the government in any vnoc and expect the PM to return to Brussels to address the backstop. They clearly stated the PM is a matter for the party
Leave voting conservative mps have confirmed the party will vote 100% for the government and that the leadership of the party leader was resolved recently.
It does look as if any attempt by Corbyn to vnoc will lose and then he is going to come under huge pressure to decide on a second referendum. Indeed he may hold over the vnoc because he would be compromised
I wouldn’t argue with most of that having said something similar below. They might have said the leadership was recently resolved but I have read that they wanted her to resign by 30th June as the price for supporting her deal. That report might not have been accurate but I am not convinced that they do regard the leadership as settled if there is any chance of changing it.
I fully expect Labour to lose the VONC. Given McCluskey’s views on a second referendum though I wouldn’t my breath on Labour supporting a second referendum. More likely he’ll be a dripping tap on a VONC as Thatcher was with Callaghan.
My meaning was perfectly clear, therefore the distinction, in this instance, is entirely unnecessary. If it doesn't affect understanding a rule is pointless to maintain. In some cases it makes a difference, but not here.
If you can't stick a pitchfork into it then it is fewer. .
Why? Was anyone unclear that I meant a number below 200 would be voting for the deal? What great miscommunication occurred?
'Just because' is not much reason to stick with something.
I can't prove this - there is as yet no reliable polling on it - but I sense that the public have started to really focus on the contents of the Withdrawal Treaty now, and in particular the Backstop. I think they might even be reading it.
Mr. Polruan, can easily reverse that. An Opposition that collaborates with the Speaker to defy constitutional conventions is in no position to criticise a PM who subsequently does likewise.
We always admire a plucky loser. Those who admire her still hate her deal according to the polls and there is no domestic policy agenda to bring party unity or electoral popularity.
I am sure May is under a lot of stress but that is because she failed to build support even though she lacks a majority. She only has herself to blame for that.
She is to blame for botching the GE - and hence not having a Con majority in the HoC - but she is not IMO to blame for the unpopularity of the withdrawal treaty.
Any feasible different leader, any feasible different approach, the process would have ended up with something very like this treaty.
It was a David v Goliath negotiation. Worse, Goliath was armed and experienced in such fights, and David wasn't and wasn't.
Starting to push the line that a PM who defies constitutional convention and refuses to resign when she’s manifestly lost the confidence of Parliament is in no position to protest about other deviations from constitutional norms.
There’s only one way to test the confidence of the house these days.
Strictly, isn’t the only change that losing a vote on a money bill is no longer a confidence matter? Which i think was only a matter of convention anyway. As I understnad it, the FTPA explained how an election could be called and what counted as a successful VONC, but it didn’t say anything about the conventions under which a government would feel bound to resign. May’s neglect of those conventions is her choice, not a change mandated in legislation.
Now that you mention it I do recall some talk on that a month ago. Perhaps you are right .
Mr. Polruan, can easily reverse that. An Opposition that collaborates with the Speaker to defy constitutional conventions is in no position to criticise a PM who subsequently does likewise.
The ‘subsequently’ is important: arguably having to pull the vote on your flagship policy to avoid losing in embarrassingly large numbers is already defying convention, because having reached the conclusion she couldn’t command the confidence of the house May should already of resigned.
Unlimited power!!! (except to modify said act and the Human Rights Act)
Yep. I mentioned this delightful piece of Blairite legislation a couple of weeks ago. One if the most pernicious and authoritarian bits of law ever passed in this country. I bet May can't wait for the chance to use it.
To be fair, it's supposed to be use in the case of things like nuclear war. Not Parliament being fucking useless.
True but at the time there were plenty of people complaining that the way it was drafted meant it basically could be used whenever the Government thought they could get away with it.
I don't actually think May would use it but it is certainly not impossible.
It also shows the HRA to be utterly worthless. Would CCA type of bill passed if there wasnt some kind of "we are the good guys, look, we passed a human rights act" mentality in parliament? Rights are something a government grants you on their terms when theyve taken away freedoms which were on your terms.
You have the *right* to swim in the lake 10am to 5pm every day when a Life Guard is in attendance (life guard is only in attendance at weekends during peak periods). As opposed to the freedom to swim in the lake, please swim responsibly.
He is my mp and is in trouble with his constituency. He was Plaid Cymru at one time and is very controversial. I have written to him and he provided a patronising response. I have asked for him to be de-selected
He is the grandson of one of the founders of Plaid Cymru. Ambrose Bebb.
We always admire a plucky loser. Those who admire her still hate her deal according to the polls and there is no domestic policy agenda to bring party unity or electoral popularity.
I am sure May is under a lot of stress but that is because she failed to build support even though she lacks a majority. She only has herself to blame for that.
She is to blame for botching the GE - and hence not having a Con majority in the HoC - but she is not IMO to blame for the unpopularity of the withdrawal treaty.
Any feasible different leader, any feasible different approach, the process would have ended up with something very like this treaty.
It was a David v Goliath negotiation. Worse, Goliath was armed and experienced in such fights, and David wasn't and wasn't.
Not convinced if that. She made two fatal errors which have put her in the position she is in - not going for a trade deal and not making the £ 39bn continent on it coming into effect. With a trade deal the backstop wouldn’t be necessary.
She wanted a special relationship with the EU that the EU weren’t interested in and made too many concessions too quickly.
We always admire a plucky loser. Those who admire her still hate her deal according to the polls and there is no domestic policy agenda to bring party unity or electoral popularity.
I am sure May is under a lot of stress but that is because she failed to build support even though she lacks a majority. She only has herself to blame for that.
She is to blame for botching the GE - and hence not having a Con majority in the HoC - but she is not IMO to blame for the unpopularity of the withdrawal treaty.
Any feasible different leader, any feasible different approach, the process would have ended up with something very like this treaty.
It was a David v Goliath negotiation. Worse, Goliath was armed and experienced in such fights, and David wasn't and wasn't.
But leavers told us we hold all the cards. Easiest trade deal in history. And EU industry would insist on giving us everything we wanted so they could continue us to sell us prosecco and BMWs.
My meaning was perfectly clear, therefore the distinction, in this instance, is entirely unnecessary. If it doesn't affect understanding a rule is pointless to maintain. In some cases it makes a difference, but not here.
If you can't stick a pitchfork into it then it is fewer. .
Why? Was anyone unclear that I meant a number below 200 would be voting for the deal? What great miscommunication occurred?
'Just because' is not much reason to stick with something.
We always admire a plucky loser. Those who admire her still hate her deal according to the polls and there is no domestic policy agenda to bring party unity or electoral popularity.
I am sure May is under a lot of stress but that is because she failed to build support even though she lacks a majority. She only has herself to blame for that.
She is to blame for botching the GE - and hence not having a Con majority in the HoC - but she is not IMO to blame for the unpopularity of the withdrawal treaty.
Any feasible different leader, any feasible different approach, the process would have ended up with something very like this treaty.
It was a David v Goliath negotiation. Worse, Goliath was armed and experienced in such fights, and David wasn't and wasn't.
Not convinced if that. She made two fatal errors which have put her in the position she is in - not going for a trade deal and not making the £ 39bn continent on it coming into effect. With a trade deal the backstop wouldn’t be necessary.
She wanted a special relationship with the EU that the EU weren’t interested in and made too many concessions too quickly.
Errr.. how often does it have to be pointed out. The WA is REQUIRED for a Trade Deal. It's how we get from point A to point B.
a backstop would still be needed/demanded in any transition period.
May holds to her position of "we were never going to get a better deal than this which is why I wasted a month of the extremely limited time we have remaining to keep asking for one"
We always admire a plucky loser. Those who admire her still hate her deal according to the polls and there is no domestic policy agenda to bring party unity or electoral popularity.
I am sure May is under a lot of stress but that is because she failed to build support even though she lacks a majority. She only has herself to blame for that.
She is to blame for botching the GE - and hence not having a Con majority in the HoC - but she is not IMO to blame for the unpopularity of the withdrawal treaty.
Any feasible different leader, any feasible different approach, the process would have ended up with something very like this treaty.
It was a David v Goliath negotiation. Worse, Goliath was armed and experienced in such fights, and David wasn't and wasn't.
Not convinced if that. She made two fatal errors which have put her in the position she is in - not going for a trade deal and not making the £ 39bn continent on it coming into effect. With a trade deal the backstop wouldn’t be necessary.
She wanted a special relationship with the EU that the EU weren’t interested in and made too many concessions too quickly.
Errr.. how often does it have to be pointed out. The WA is REQUIRED for a Trade Deal. It's how we get from point A to point B.
a backstop would still be needed/demanded in any transition period.
We could have agreed a trade deal now, technically, but not feasibly because as 29 March 2019 approach we'd have to switch to a WA anyway.
She has absolutely no room to manoeuvre if those 5 prove correct which means she is more of a lame duck than she is now. If she doesn’t resign, she has two immediate problems - staving off defeat in a VONC and trying to keep control of the political agenda.
She is certainly in a tight corner. Hence the tidal wave of support for her amongst ordinary decent people. The British people, particularly decent ordinary ones, tend to rally to the cause of someone who is in a tight corner. History is littered with examples of that.
The public understand the stress that Mrs May is under. They are no doubt aware of the copious research which shows that the most unpleasant of all positions in the workplace is that of hapless middle-manager caught between the devil of a capricious and unyielding boss (EU) and the deep blue sea of a bunch of unruly miscreants (MPs) whom one is technically responsible for managing. They can relate to this, ordinary people can, and it breaks their hearts to see their Prime Minister in such a place.
Still, all very well, but it is hard to see the relevance of this to the likely margin of defeat tomorrow. Looks like it is going to be a rather heavy one.
We always admire a plucky loser. Those who admire her still hate her deal according to the polls and there is no domestic policy agenda to bring party unity or electoral popularity.
I am sure May is under a lot of stress but that is because she failed to build support even though she lacks a majority. She only has herself to blame for that.
If she is not going to resign and she is not going to give up her deal, a GE seems the only way for her to proceed, even though she’s already said she’ll resign before the next one.
The DUP have just said that they will support the government in any vnoc and expect the PM to return to Brussels to address the backstop. They clearly stated the PM is a matter for the party
Leave voting conservative mps have confirmed the party will vote 100% for the government and that the leadership of the party leader was resolved recently.
It does look as if any attempt by Corbyn to vnoc will lose and then he is going to come under huge pressure to decide on a second referendum. Indeed he may hold over the vnoc because he would be compromised
The DUP are good at negotiating because they are both clear what they want and hold firm on their red lines. May not.
May holds to her position of "we were never going to get a better deal than this which is why I wasted a month of the extremely limited time we have remaining to keep asking for one"
I'm sure that Juncker and Tusk just write out those letters, perhaps on Christmas day, at the drop of a hat and I would imagine that no planning or liaison or recourse to their advisers and civil servants, nor refinement of the final texts, is needed at all.
We always admire a plucky loser. Those who admire her still hate her deal according to the polls and there is no domestic policy agenda to bring party unity or electoral popularity.
I am sure May is under a lot of stress but that is because she failed to build support even though she lacks a majority. She only has herself to blame for that.
She is to blame for botching the GE - and hence not having a Con majority in the HoC - but she is not IMO to blame for the unpopularity of the withdrawal treaty.
Any feasible different leader, any feasible different approach, the process would have ended up with something very like this treaty.
It was a David v Goliath negotiation. Worse, Goliath was armed and experienced in such fights, and David wasn't and wasn't.
Not convinced if that. She made two fatal errors which have put her in the position she is in - not going for a trade deal and not making the £ 39bn continent on it coming into effect. With a trade deal the backstop wouldn’t be necessary.
She wanted a special relationship with the EU that the EU weren’t interested in and made too many concessions too quickly.
Errr.. how often does it have to be pointed out. The WA is REQUIRED for a Trade Deal. It's how we get from point A to point B.
a backstop would still be needed/demanded in any transition period.
We would not need a backstop if we had negotiated a trade deal at the same time as the Withdrawal Agreement. That's where the EU and the UK have gone glaringly wrong.
We always admire a plucky loser. Those who admire her still hate her deal according to the polls and there is no domestic policy agenda to bring party unity or electoral popularity.
I am sure May is under a lot of stress but that is because she failed to build support even though she lacks a majority. She only has herself to blame for that.
She is to blame for botching the GE - and hence not having a Con majority in the HoC - but she is not IMO to blame for the unpopularity of the withdrawal treaty.
Any feasible different leader, any feasible different approach, the process would have ended up with something very like this treaty.
It was a David v Goliath negotiation. Worse, Goliath was armed and experienced in such fights, and David wasn't and wasn't.
Not convinced if that. She made two fatal errors which have put her in the position she is in - not going for a trade deal and not making the £ 39bn continent on it coming into effect. With a trade deal the backstop wouldn’t be necessary.
She wanted a special relationship with the EU that the EU weren’t interested in and made too many concessions too quickly.
Errr.. how often does it have to be pointed out. The WA is REQUIRED for a Trade Deal. It's how we get from point A to point B.
a backstop would still be needed/demanded in any transition period.
We could have agreed a trade deal now, technically, but not feasibly because as 29 March 2019 approach we'd have to switch to a WA anyway.
No we wouldn't. The EU are/have refused to talk a trade deal until a WA is agreed.
We always admire a plucky loser. Those who admire her still hate her deal according to the polls and there is no domestic policy agenda to bring party unity or electoral popularity.
I am sure May is under a lot of stress but that is because she failed to build support even though she lacks a majority. She only has herself to blame for that.
She is to blame for botching the GE - and hence not having a Con majority in the HoC - but she is not IMO to blame for the unpopularity of the withdrawal treaty.
Any feasible different leader, any feasible different approach, the process would have ended up with something very like this treaty.
It was a David v Goliath negotiation. Worse, Goliath was armed and experienced in such fights, and David wasn't and wasn't.
Not convinced if that. She made two fatal errors which have put her in the position she is in - not going for a trade deal and not making the £ 39bn continent on it coming into effect. With a trade deal the backstop wouldn’t be necessary.
She wanted a special relationship with the EU that the EU weren’t interested in and made too many concessions too quickly.
Errr.. how often does it have to be pointed out. The WA is REQUIRED for a Trade Deal. It's how we get from point A to point B.
a backstop would still be needed/demanded in any transition period.
We could have agreed a trade deal now, technically, but not feasibly because as 29 March 2019 approach we'd have to switch to a WA anyway.
It's one reason why May's Deal is not trusted to deliver. If there was good faith on the EU side then they could have spent the last two years negotiating at least the framework of the Trade Deal. Which would have made the backstop far less likely to be required (or if they had been complete arseholes, made No Deal planning start WAY earlier too). But there was utter intransigence from the EU. It should have been met with the Paddington Hard Stare. Instead, we caved.
Well, at least we can have a better strategy next time when we withdraw and immediately reissue the Article 50 Notice......
She has absolutely no room to manoeuvre if those 5 prove correct which means she is more of a lame duck than she is now. If she doesn’t resign, she has two immediate problems - staving off defeat in a VONC and trying to keep control of the political agenda.
She is certainly in a tight corner. Hence the tidal wave of support for her amongst ordinary decent people. The British people, particularly decent ordinary ones, tend to rally to the cause of someone who is in a tight corner. History is littered with examples of that.
The public understand the stress that Mrs May is under. They are no doubt aware of the copious research which shows that the most unpleasant of all positions in the workplace is that of hapless middle-manager caught between the devil of a capricious and unyielding boss (EU) and the deep blue sea of a bunch of unruly miscreants (MPs) whom one is technically responsible for managing. They can relate to this, ordinary people can, and it breaks their hearts to see their Prime Minister in such a place.
Still, all very well, but it is hard to see the relevance of this to the likely margin of defeat tomorrow. Looks like it is going to be a rather heavy one.
We always admire a plucky loser. Those who admire her still hate her deal according to the polls and there is no domestic policy agenda to bring party unity or electoral popularity.
I am sure May is under a lot of stress but that is because she failed to build support even though she lacks a majority. She only has herself to blame for that.
If she is not going to resign and she is not going to give up her deal, a GE seems the only way for her to proceed, even though she’s already said she’ll resign before the next one.
The DUP have just said that they will support the government in any vnoc and expect the PM to return to Brussels to address the backstop. They clearly stated the PM is a matter for the party
Leave voting conservative mps have confirmed the party will vote 100% for the government and that the leadership of the party leader was resolved recently.
It does look as if any attempt by Corbyn to vnoc will lose and then he is going to come under huge pressure to decide on a second referendum. Indeed he may hold over the vnoc because he would be compromised
The DUP are good at negotiating because they are both clear what they want and hold firm on their red lines. May not.
They also have a lot less to lose, in the short and medium term.
We always admire a plucky loser. Those who admire her still hate her deal according to the polls and there is no domestic policy agenda to bring party unity or electoral popularity.
I am sure May is under a lot of stress but that is because she failed to build support even though she lacks a majority. She only has herself to blame for that.
She is to blame for botching the GE - and hence not having a Con majority in the HoC - but she is not IMO to blame for the unpopularity of the withdrawal treaty.
Any feasible different leader, any feasible different approach, the process would have ended up with something very like this treaty.
It was a David v Goliath negotiation. Worse, Goliath was armed and experienced in such fights, and David wasn't and wasn't.
Not convinced if that. She made two fatal errors which have put her in the position she is in - not going for a trade deal and not making the £ 39bn continent on it coming into effect. With a trade deal the backstop wouldn’t be necessary.
She wanted a special relationship with the EU that the EU weren’t interested in and made too many concessions too quickly.
Errr.. how often does it have to be pointed out. The WA is REQUIRED for a Trade Deal. It's how we get from point A to point B.
a backstop would still be needed/demanded in any transition period.
We could have agreed a trade deal now, technically, but not feasibly because as 29 March 2019 approach we'd have to switch to a WA anyway.
No we wouldn't. The EU are/have refused to talk a trade deal until a WA is agreed.
Well I agree. But those that opposed May's strategy think she could have renegotiated that.
No doubt the PB Tories will enjoy several bouts of onanism over the story for a while.
She's right that, off peak, first class is often just a few quid more, and does provide a quiet environment to get stuff done. It's hardly turning left on the aeroplane.
Do they have seats if you turn right? I never knew....
I hear that you have to make your own bed
Christ, I have inadvertently trigger the PB Tory First Class Air Travellers' Tales thing!
I repent! I repent! I REPENT!
When Brexit goes tits up and we no-deal exit, does that mean we will have to make do with boxed wine?
We always admire a plucky loser. Those who admire her still hate her deal according to the polls and there is no domestic policy agenda to bring party unity or electoral popularity.
I am sure May is under a lot of stress but that is because she failed to build support even though she lacks a majority. She only has herself to blame for that.
She is to blame for botching the GE - and hence not having a Con majority in the HoC - but she is not IMO to blame for the unpopularity of the withdrawal treaty.
Any feasible different leader, any feasible different approach, the process would have ended up with something very like this treaty.
It was a David v Goliath negotiation. Worse, Goliath was armed and experienced in such fights, and David wasn't and wasn't.
Not convinced if that. She made two fatal errors which have put her in the position she is in - not going for a trade deal and not making the £ 39bn continent on it coming into effect. With a trade deal the backstop wouldn’t be necessary.
She wanted a special relationship with the EU that the EU weren’t interested in and made too many concessions too quickly.
Errr.. how often does it have to be pointed out. The WA is REQUIRED for a Trade Deal. It's how we get from point A to point B.
a backstop would still be needed/demanded in any transition period.
We could have agreed a trade deal now, technically, but not feasibly because as 29 March 2019 approach we'd have to switch to a WA anyway.
It's one reason why May's Deal is not trusted to deliver. If there was good faith on the EU side then they could have spent the last two years negotiating at least the framework of the Trade Deal. Which would have made the backstop far less likely to be required (or if they had been complete arseholes, made No Deal planning start WAY earlier too). But there was utter intransigence from the EU. It should have been met with the Paddington Hard Stare. Instead, we caved.
Well, at least we can have a better strategy next time when we withdraw and immediately reissue the Article 50 Notice......
With a No Deal we can then start negotiating a Trade Deal in parallel with a Withdrawal Agreement. That also allows us an extra bargaining chip of EU payments to get a good trade deal.
We always admire a plucky loser. Those who admire her still hate her deal according to the polls and there is no domestic policy agenda to bring party unity or electoral popularity.
I am sure May is under a lot of stress but that is because she failed to build support even though she lacks a majority. She only has herself to blame for that.
She is to blame for botching the GE - and hence not having a Con majority in the HoC - but she is not IMO to blame for the unpopularity of the withdrawal treaty.
Any feasible different leader, any feasible different approach, the process would have ended up with something very like this treaty.
It was a David v Goliath negotiation. Worse, Goliath was armed and experienced in such fights, and David wasn't and wasn't.
Not convinced if that. She made two fatal errors which have put her in the position she is in - not going for a trade deal and not making the £ 39bn continent on it coming into effect. With a trade deal the backstop wouldn’t be necessary.
She wanted a special relationship with the EU that the EU weren’t interested in and made too many concessions too quickly.
Errr.. how often does it have to be pointed out. The WA is REQUIRED for a Trade Deal. It's how we get from point A to point B.
a backstop would still be needed/demanded in any transition period.
We could have agreed a trade deal now, technically, but not feasibly because as 29 March 2019 approach we'd have to switch to a WA anyway.
It's one reason why May's Deal is not trusted to deliver. If there was good faith on the EU side then they could have spent the last two years negotiating at least the framework of the Trade Deal. Which would have made the backstop far less likely to be required (or if they had been complete arseholes, made No Deal planning start WAY earlier too). But there was utter intransigence from the EU. It should have been met with the Paddington Hard Stare. Instead, we caved.
Well, at least we can have a better strategy next time when we withdraw and immediately reissue the Article 50 Notice......
We always admire a plucky loser. Those who admire her still hate her deal according to the polls and there is no domestic policy agenda to bring party unity or electoral popularity.
I am sure May is under a lot of stress but that is because she failed to build support even though she lacks a majority. She only has herself to blame for that.
She is to blame for botching the GE - and hence not having a Con majority in the HoC - but she is not IMO to blame for the unpopularity of the withdrawal treaty.
Any feasible different leader, any feasible different approach, the process would have ended up with something very like this treaty.
It was a David v Goliath negotiation. Worse, Goliath was armed and experienced in such fights, and David wasn't and wasn't.
Not convinced if that. She made two fatal errors which have put her in the position she is in - not going for a trade deal and not making the £ 39bn continent on it coming into effect. With a trade deal the backstop wouldn’t be necessary.
She wanted a special relationship with the EU that the EU weren’t interested in and made too many concessions too quickly.
Errr.. how often does it have to be pointed out. The WA is REQUIRED for a Trade Deal. It's how we get from point A to point B.
a backstop would still be needed/demanded in any transition period.
We would not need a backstop if we had negotiated a trade deal at the same time as the Withdrawal Agreement. That's where the EU and the UK have gone glaringly wrong.
The EU didn't want to do that. It might well have been utterly wrong of them, but if they refused to do it how would we make them?
No doubt the PB Tories will enjoy several bouts of onanism over the story for a while.
She's right that, off peak, first class is often just a few quid more, and does provide a quiet environment to get stuff done. It's hardly turning left on the aeroplane.
Do they have seats if you turn right? I never knew....
I hear that you have to make your own bed
Christ, I have inadvertently trigger the PB Tory First Class Air Travellers' Tales thing!
I repent! I repent! I REPENT!
When Brexit goes tits up and we no-deal exit, does that mean we will have to make do with boxed wine?
No. Like Roman times England and Wales now have their own wine. With global warming Scotland and NI may also get their own wine in time.
We always admire a plucky loser. Those who admire her still hate her deal according to the polls and there is no domestic policy agenda to bring party unity or electoral popularity.
I am sure May is under a lot of stress but that is because she failed to build support even though she lacks a majority. She only has herself to blame for that.
She is to blame for botching the GE - and hence not having a Con majority in the HoC - but she is not IMO to blame for the unpopularity of the withdrawal treaty.
Any feasible different leader, any feasible different approach, the process would have ended up with something very like this treaty.
It was a David v Goliath negotiation. Worse, Goliath was armed and experienced in such fights, and David wasn't and wasn't.
Not convinced if that. She made two fatal errors which have put her in the position she is in - not going for a trade deal and not making the £ 39bn continent on it coming into effect. With a trade deal the backstop wouldn’t be necessary.
She wanted a special relationship with the EU that the EU weren’t interested in and made too many concessions too quickly.
Errr.. how often does it have to be pointed out. The WA is REQUIRED for a Trade Deal. It's how we get from point A to point B.
a backstop would still be needed/demanded in any transition period.
We could have agreed a trade deal now, technically, but not feasibly because as 29 March 2019 approach we'd have to switch to a WA anyway.
It's one reason why May's Deal is not trusted to deliver. If there was good faith on the EU side then they could have spent the last two years negotiating at least the framework of the Trade Deal. Which would have made the backstop far less likely to be required (or if they had been complete arseholes, made No Deal planning start WAY earlier too). But there was utter intransigence from the EU. It should have been met with the Paddington Hard Stare. Instead, we caved.
Well, at least we can have a better strategy next time when we withdraw and immediately reissue the Article 50 Notice......
It's this or nothing, I think.
And wouldn't you know, parliament would prefer nothing. How remarkable.
No doubt the PB Tories will enjoy several bouts of onanism over the story for a while.
She's right that, off peak, first class is often just a few quid more, and does provide a quiet environment to get stuff done. It's hardly turning left on the aeroplane.
Do they have seats if you turn right? I never knew....
I hear that you have to make your own bed
Christ, I have inadvertently trigger the PB Tory First Class Air Travellers' Tales thing!
I repent! I repent! I REPENT!
When Brexit goes tits up and we no-deal exit, does that mean we will have to make do with boxed wine?
No. Like Roman times England and Wales now have their own wine. With global warming Scotland and NI may also get their own wine in time.
Well aware. Nyetimber for Christmas at Chez Urquhart. However, unlike SeanT I am not an international bestseller and not sure I can justify it on a daily basis.
Viewed hundreds of thousands of times on YouTube, the slick films, fronted by British presenters, appear to be the work of grassroots campaigners seeking to raise awareness of social ills. They feature interviews with trade union leaders, Labour politicians and prominent left-wing activists.
What viewers may not realise is that the documentaries are the work of an enigmatic new media organisation funded by the Russian state.
The organisation, Redfish, is based in Berlin and specialises in creating youth-friendly films highlighting political and social instability in western European democracies.
Last year The Times reported that Redfish, a subsidiary of RT, the television network controlled by the Kremlin.
We always admire a plucky loser. Those who admire her still hate her deal according to the polls and there is no domestic policy agenda to bring party unity or electoral popularity.
I am sure May is under a lot of stress but that is because she failed to build support even though she lacks a majority. She only has herself to blame for that.
She is to blame for botching the GE - and hence not having a Con majority in the HoC - but she is not IMO to blame for the unpopularity of the withdrawal treaty.
Any feasible different leader, any feasible different approach, the process would have ended up with something very like this treaty.
It was a David v Goliath negotiation. Worse, Goliath was armed and experienced in such fights, and David wasn't and wasn't.
Not convinced if that. She made two fatal errors which have put her in the position she is in - not going for a trade deal and not making the £ 39bn continent on it coming into effect. With a trade deal the backstop wouldn’t be necessary.
She wanted a special relationship with the EU that the EU weren’t interested in and made too many concessions too quickly.
Errr.. how often does it have to be pointed out. The WA is REQUIRED for a Trade Deal. It's how we get from point A to point B.
a backstop would still be needed/demanded in any transition period.
We would not need a backstop if we had negotiated a trade deal at the same time as the Withdrawal Agreement. That's where the EU and the UK have gone glaringly wrong.
The EU didn't want to do that. It might well have been utterly wrong of them, but if they refused to do it how would we make them?
Close down discussions. Head towards a (publically well-planned) No Deal Brexit.
See who blinks. (Hint: Mutti has said no way could Germany allow a No Deal Brexit....)
I can't prove this - there is as yet no reliable polling on it - but I sense that the public have started to really focus on the contents of the Withdrawal Treaty now, and in particular the Backstop. I think they might even be reading it.
LOL. I get the ‘what a weirdo’ stare from my politico mates after confessing to having read the agreement.
You can back Theresa May to step down as Conservative party leader between January and March this year at 3.6 on Betfair. That seems very fair, considering that she might quite conceivably be doing that tomorrow night.
No doubt the PB Tories will enjoy several bouts of onanism over the story for a while.
She's right that, off peak, first class is often just a few quid more, and does provide a quiet environment to get stuff done. It's hardly turning left on the aeroplane.
Do they have seats if you turn right? I never knew....
I hear that you have to make your own bed
Christ, I have inadvertently trigger the PB Tory First Class Air Travellers' Tales thing!
I repent! I repent! I REPENT!
When Brexit goes tits up and we no-deal exit, does that mean we will have to make do with boxed wine?
We always admire a plucky loser. Those who admire her still hate her deal according to the polls and there is no domestic policy agenda to bring party unity or electoral popularity.
I am sure May is under a lot of stress but that is because she failed to build support even though she lacks a majority. She only has herself to blame for that.
She is to blame for botching the GE - and hence not having a Con majority in the HoC - but she is not IMO to blame for the unpopularity of the withdrawal treaty.
Any feasible different leader, any feasible different approach, the process would have ended up with something very like this treaty.
It was a David v Goliath negotiation. Worse, Goliath was armed and experienced in such fights, and David wasn't and wasn't.
Not convinced if that. She made two fatal errors which have put her in the position she is in - not going for a trade deal and not making the £ 39bn continent on it coming into effect. With a trade deal the backstop wouldn’t be necessary.
She wanted a special relationship with the EU that the EU weren’t interested in and made too many concessions too quickly.
Errr.. how often does it have to be pointed out. The WA is REQUIRED for a Trade Deal. It's how we get from point A to point B.
a backstop would still be needed/demanded in any transition period.
We could have agreed a trade deal now, technically, but not feasibly because as 29 March 2019 approach we'd have to switch to a WA anyway.
It's one reason why May's Deal is not trusted to deliver. If there was good faith on the EU side then they could have spent the last two years negotiating at least the framework of the Trade Deal. Which would have made the backstop far less likely to be required (or if they had been complete arseholes, made No Deal planning start WAY earlier too). But there was utter intransigence from the EU. It should have been met with the Paddington Hard Stare. Instead, we caved.
Well, at least we can have a better strategy next time when we withdraw and immediately reissue the Article 50 Notice......
It's this or nothing, I think.
With 400 spineless majority-ignoring MPs wanting to Remain? Whatever makes you think that....?
I can't prove this - there is as yet no reliable polling on it - but I sense that the public have started to really focus on the contents of the Withdrawal Treaty now, and in particular the Backstop. I think they might even be reading it.
LOL. I get the ‘what a weirdo’ stare from my politico mates after confessing to having read the agreement.
If we get a no deal Brexit ex pats will have to pass a driving test in their new country. I would guess many will fail, due to the language and not having to take a test for decades.
PG&E, which serves 15 million Californians - almost 40% of the population of the state - warned then it could face "significant liability" beyond its insured amount if its equipment was found to have caused the fire.
I don't think there's a wave of enthusiasm for the Deal. More that there a lot of people who think it's okay, not bad, can live with it, and feel some sympathy for the PM.
Serious question:
What percentage of the public do you think have a good understanding of the Withdrawal Treaty, the Political Declaration, the legal status of each, and how the one relates to the other?
(a) More than 50% (b) Between 10% and 50% (c) Less than 10%
With a No Deal we can then start negotiating a Trade Deal in parallel with a Withdrawal Agreement. That also allows us an extra bargaining chip of EU payments to get a good trade deal.
This really is the weirdest of all the weird suggestions floating around, given that the vast bulk of the economic damage from No Deal would arise from the immediate chaos of crashing out with no transition.
I don't think there's a wave of enthusiasm for the Deal. More that there a lot of people who think it's okay, not bad, can live with it, and feel some sympathy for the PM.
Serious question:
What percentage of the public do you think have a good understanding of the Withdrawal Treaty, the Political Declaration, the legal status of each, and how the one relates to the other?
(a) More than 50% (b) Between 10% and 50% (c) Less than 10%
Bugger all. When ever I talk to people about this, many think it is THE DEAL as in the final trade agreement, not just the divorce paperwork.
With a No Deal we can then start negotiating a Trade Deal in parallel with a Withdrawal Agreement. That also allows us an extra bargaining chip of EU payments to get a good trade deal.
This really is the weirdest of all the weird suggestions floating around, given that the vast bulk of the economic damage from No Deal will arise from the immediate chaos of crashing out with no transition.
I think that the word you are looking for may be imbecilic.
With a No Deal we can then start negotiating a Trade Deal in parallel with a Withdrawal Agreement. That also allows us an extra bargaining chip of EU payments to get a good trade deal.
This really is the weirdest of all the weird suggestions floating around, given that the vast bulk of the economic damage from No Deal will arise from the immediate chaos of crashing out with no transition.
I think that the word you are looking for may be imbecilic.
I don't think there's a wave of enthusiasm for the Deal. More that there a lot of people who think it's okay, not bad, can live with it, and feel some sympathy for the PM.
Serious question:
What percentage of the public do you think have a good understanding of the Withdrawal Treaty, the Political Declaration, the legal status of each, and how the one relates to the other?
(a) More than 50% (b) Between 10% and 50% (c) Less than 10%
I don't think there's a wave of enthusiasm for the Deal. More that there a lot of people who think it's okay, not bad, can live with it, and feel some sympathy for the PM.
Serious question:
What percentage of the public do you think have a good understanding of the Withdrawal Treaty, the Political Declaration, the legal status of each, and how the one relates to the other?
(a) More than 50% (b) Between 10% and 50% (c) Less than 10%
Bugger all. When ever I talk to people about this, many think it is THE DEAL as in the final trade agreement, not just the divorce paperwork.
It's almost worth passing the deal just for the moment of anger when March 29th ticks round and the only thing that happens is that we launch into another two years of Brexit negotiations.
I don't think there's a wave of enthusiasm for the Deal. More that there a lot of people who think it's okay, not bad, can live with it, and feel some sympathy for the PM.
Serious question:
What percentage of the public do you think have a good understanding of the Withdrawal Treaty, the Political Declaration, the legal status of each, and how the one relates to the other?
(a) More than 50% (b) Between 10% and 50% (c) Less than 10%
Bugger all. When ever I talk to people about this, many think it is THE DEAL as in the final trade agreement, not just the divorce paperwork.
A lot of people gonna be very pissed off when they find we are all still arguing about this at next GE, even if it is 2022.
I don't think there's a wave of enthusiasm for the Deal. More that there a lot of people who think it's okay, not bad, can live with it, and feel some sympathy for the PM.
Serious question:
What percentage of the public do you think have a good understanding of the Withdrawal Treaty, the Political Declaration, the legal status of each, and how the one relates to the other?
(a) More than 50% (b) Between 10% and 50% (c) Less than 10%
I don't think there's a wave of enthusiasm for the Deal. More that there a lot of people who think it's okay, not bad, can live with it, and feel some sympathy for the PM.
Serious question:
What percentage of the public do you think have a good understanding of the Withdrawal Treaty, the Political Declaration, the legal status of each, and how the one relates to the other?
(a) More than 50% (b) Between 10% and 50% (c) Less than 10%
(c)++ I'm a total nerd and I don't understand it well enough to confidently explain it to someone else.
I don't think there's a wave of enthusiasm for the Deal. More that there a lot of people who think it's okay, not bad, can live with it, and feel some sympathy for the PM.
Serious question:
What percentage of the public do you think have a good understanding of the Withdrawal Treaty, the Political Declaration, the legal status of each, and how the one relates to the other?
(a) More than 50% (b) Between 10% and 50% (c) Less than 10%
Not convinced if that. She made two fatal errors which have put her in the position she is in - not going for a trade deal and not making the £ 39bn continent on it coming into effect. With a trade deal the backstop wouldn’t be necessary.
She wanted a special relationship with the EU that the EU weren’t interested in and made too many concessions too quickly.
Could have been a bit more hardball on the moolah, perhaps, but the EU were adamant about the sequencing - leave first then we talk trade, cannot negotiate a trade deal while you are still a member of the club. I did not get the impression that was anything but a statement of fact.
Comments
Might've been just wet leavers; I wasn't sure.
I fully expect Labour to lose the VONC. Given McCluskey’s views on a second referendum though I wouldn’t my breath on Labour supporting a second referendum. More likely he’ll be a dripping tap on a VONC as Thatcher was with Callaghan.
'Just because' is not much reason to stick with something.
Any feasible different leader, any feasible different approach, the process would have ended up with something very like this treaty.
It was a David v Goliath negotiation. Worse, Goliath was armed and experienced in such fights, and David wasn't and wasn't.
You have the *right* to swim in the lake 10am to 5pm every day when a Life Guard is in attendance (life guard is only in attendance at weekends during peak periods). As opposed to the freedom to swim in the lake, please swim responsibly.
Or the UUUP. Motto: there is no "U" in Party
https://twitter.com/estwebber/status/1084840356351492096
She wanted a special relationship with the EU that the EU weren’t interested in and made too many concessions too quickly.
I've still said I'd vote for it over the other options available. Although with a heart made of osmium.
a backstop would still be needed/demanded in any transition period.
Well, at least we can have a better strategy next time when we withdraw and immediately reissue the Article 50 Notice......
Frankly, the total absence of rice pudding is preferable to unlimited rice pudding.
But you do get 7 Old Who points for knowing the reference.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6589765/Finnish-President-expresses-disgust-migrant-grooming-gangs-child-sex-scandal-escalates.html
Viewed hundreds of thousands of times on YouTube, the slick films, fronted by British presenters, appear to be the work of grassroots campaigners seeking to raise awareness of social ills. They feature interviews with trade union leaders, Labour politicians and prominent left-wing activists.
What viewers may not realise is that the documentaries are the work of an enigmatic new media organisation funded by the Russian state.
The organisation, Redfish, is based in Berlin and specialises in creating youth-friendly films highlighting political and social instability in western European democracies.
Last year The Times reported that Redfish, a subsidiary of RT, the television network controlled by the Kremlin.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/far-left-falls-for-slick-anti-uk-videos-6x5qkt7fr
See who blinks. (Hint: Mutti has said no way could Germany allow a No Deal Brexit....)
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/jan/14/west-yorkshire-police-arrest-55-men-child-sexual-abuse-investigation
According to the report, some of the men were arrested at the Town Hall in Dewsbury, which is disturbing in its implications.
What have you done Francis!?!
FFS!!!!
I suspect this is the most damning bit of the entire story @theresa_may concedes she has let DUP down
If we get a no deal Brexit ex pats will have to pass a driving test in their new country.
I would guess many will fail, due to the language and not having to take a test for decades.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-46867001
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2019/01/14/pge-file-bankruptcy-following-devastating-california-wildfires/
Anyway VOTOFNOC, as it sounds like a Russian poison.
What percentage of the public do you think have a good understanding of the Withdrawal Treaty, the Political Declaration, the legal status of each, and how the one relates to the other?
(a) More than 50%
(b) Between 10% and 50%
(c) Less than 10%
Among MP's, perhaps 15-20%.
I would rather be Jezza at this moment in history. Saw his Marr interview and he looked like the cat who had got the cream.
We could be on the verge of a massive and irreversible shift of wealth, power and influence in favour of working people.
Ooooo.
There, I've even given you a new subject as you can all debate what an acronym is.