So, after a seismic 48 hours...Nothing has changed.
The stalemate continues.
At least we had something to bet on, and I am £100 better off.
There is no doubt that TM legacy will be 'nothing has changed' but no matter your politics you have to be amazed at her resilience and dedication to public service
She's autistic. That's all.
Can you provide a link to your allegation
At the risk of sounding like a snowflake the increasing use of "autistic" in a pejorative context (first used against Gordon Brown I believe) is not a welcome trend.
Totally agreed. And even if someone insists it is not intended to be pejorative (and yet it does only seem to be used against a person to explain the aspects of them which people are critical of), such amateur diagnosis is an unnecessary, unhelpful path to go down in my view. I don't think we need to belabour the point, but I see no reason why it should be used as an insult, and its not a good idea to guess at someone's health.
As Richard Nabavi pointed out earlier, for Parliament to come to an agreement, options have to be taken off the table.
Corbyn has removed a snap election off the table. That's good, because one fewer option means more scope for an agreement.
It does, however, mean that Jeremy Corbyn will, at long, long, looooong last, need a Brexit policy.
I don't really understand why Corbyn didn't just support May's deal, but say it was awful. He'd then have passed his no-confidence motion, and there would be a GE.
I think that has to be his plan before 29mar. He simply doesn't care about the EU deals or otherwise. He's a revolutionary - he wants us wearing Chairman Corbyn hats. Happily he's a total idiot too, and didn't see his chance.
Because. To state the obvious. Corbyn does not command the loyalty of his MPs. Had he done as you suggest the deal would have still fallen in all probability due to a massive Labour and Tory rebellion. What is more he would have faced an instant leadership challenge with no certainty of winning this time.
A sudden unexpected GE would give both Labour and the Tories a headache if they simultaneously had leadership contests. If Corbyn wins a GE he's safe, and he'll make himself safer via a very harsh purge. I suggested supporting May's deal above, but clearly the sensible thing (for them) would to have just abstained.
We have had benign Governments for hundreds of years and that creates huge dangers should the ill-willed ever take the reigns.
Unlike Lewis and Woodcock who actively chose to abstain tonight, and I say this with a good deal of kindness, but Flynn really needs to resign his seat.
Do we know how sick he is? It would be sad to see a repeat of what happened in 1979, where the VonC came down to an MP who was five days from meeting his maker.
Mr Flynn is now confined to bed because of rheumatoid arthritis, but also suffered from pernicious anaemia earlier this year and has been unable to travel to Westminster for some months.
"I am confined to bed and have four carers a day. My wife, Sam, is wonderful and Jessica Morden [the Newport East MP] has been magnificent.”
He said Brexit was “absolute madness" but vowed to take part in a Commons vote on any Brexit deal presented to Parliament.
"I will go to the Commons on a stretcher if I have to," he added.
There will be a second referendum and Remain will win, not because of the merits of staying in, but because the Brexit debate has shown quite clearly that our MPs are not up to the job of governing Britain. Too many of them, in all parties, want to be paid for doing what Brussels tells them.
The best option by far would have negotiated a trade deal along the lines of those like Canada’s and a clean break. That opportunity has been lost. The Norway option is a dead end. It takes us out of the CAP and CFP but they weren’t the main causes that led to Leave winning originally.
It is setting up for if there is a no deal he will blame May and say if only she has been sensible they could have talked and found unicorn poop together. The reality is he isn’t exactly working very hard to stop brexit.
Corbyn is absolutely right to refuse to talk to May unless she takes no deal off the table. Keeping No Deal alive is blackmail, and nobody in good conscience could be expected to negotiate where the other party is trying to blackmail you.
I would expect the other parties to similarly decline May's invitation.
This makes absolutely no sense to me. Why not go into talks with May without pre-condition? That immediately gives Labour the moral high ground. They can then come out of them and say they were pointless because she would not budge.
Well quite. It might take mere minutes, but it avoids a currently easy retort for the government now.
Unlike Lewis and Woodcock who actively chose to abstain tonight, and I say this with a good deal of kindness, but Flynn really needs to resign his seat.
Do we know how sick he is? It would be sad to see a repeat of what happened in 1979, where the VonC came down to an MP who was five days from meeting his maker.
The official story is he has very severe arthritis and therefore finds it very difficult to move.
I'm starting to wonder if there's a bit more to it than that.
Rees-Mogg just confirmed to Andrew Neil that he'll support Govt in a future VONC whatever May does in the Brexit negotiations.
Of course he will, as will every MP wishing to remain a member of the Conservative party.
This is the root of why the FTPA is such a problem: a decade ago, last night’s vote would have been made an issue of confidence, the equivalent of a four line whip, and would probably have passed.
Or have led to the fall of the government. It is a two-edged sword.
So, after a seismic 48 hours...Nothing has changed.
The stalemate continues.
At least we had something to bet on, and I am £100 better off.
There is no doubt that TM legacy will be 'nothing has changed' but no matter your politics you have to be amazed at her resilience and dedication to public service
She's autistic. That's all.
Can you provide a link to your allegation
She's described "as having no friends" by michael gove People have said she lacks warmth and personality on first meeting. She even has the autistic facial structure, wide eyes and cat face. It has variously been said that she is ‘fundamentally unknowable’, ‘aloof’, ’reticent’, ‘self-contained’ and ‘sphinx like’.
She shows every single trait of somebody with autism. Her absurd, self-defeating stubbornness, secrecy and absolute imperviousness to either shame or change are all just part of May's neurological makeup.
Theresa May is neurologically incapable of the task to which we have set her. In many ways it's cruel, because we're torturing a helpless innocent.
That is not a link to medical confirmation and without it you may want to take care in your allegations
Tim, who repeated all that rubbish about Seabourne, take care in his allegations? Say it ain't so...
This makes absolutely no sense to me. Why not go into talks with May without pre-condition? That immediately gives Labour the moral high ground. They can then come out of them and say they were pointless because she would not budge.
If one is speeding towards an oncoming lorry, and 2 passengers think we should swerve to the left and 2 to the right, what is the responsible driver to do? Especially when a fifth is urging you to speed up and keep straight on.
Well, if you are Labour leader you refuse to talk about it.
Corbyn is absolutely right to refuse to talk to May unless she takes no deal off the table. Keeping No Deal alive is blackmail, and nobody in good conscience could be expected to negotiate where the other party is trying to blackmail you.
I would expect the other parties to similarly decline May's invitation.
Until something is agreed no deal cannot be ruled out. No, refusing to do something is not blackmail, even if it is bloody stupid. And if it is, is not refusing to budge on their own side not also blackmail?
The blackmail talk is among the silliest of the claims around this issue. May's actions have been pigheaded and self defeating at times, and I sure don't want no deal, but it's not blackmail to hold firm, when the other side is also holding firm. What, they'll allow no deal because she won't rule out no deal?
Rees-Mogg just confirmed to Andrew Neil that he'll support Govt in a future VONC whatever May does in the Brexit negotiations.
Of course he will, as will every MP wishing to remain a member of the Conservative party.
This is the root of why the FTPA is such a problem: a decade ago, last night’s vote would have been made an issue of confidence, the equivalent of a four line whip, and would probably have passed.
It would have been very close indeed.
The Gov't would have had 325 less 10 DUP = 315. (Tories + Hermon less Laing less 2 tellers) Opposition is trickier to calculate. Starting from tonight's total we need to add 10 DUP. So 316.
Then what do Ivan Lewis, Frank Field, Onasunya, Flynn, Woodcock do on a vote they all know is going to a knife edge ?
Why weaken your hand and make the EU refuse further concessions. It is not going to happen until a clear alternative has been decided upon
The EU is doing a pretty fine job of refusing concessions. They have been clear. Any concessions require a quid pro quo. Those insisting on wanting movement around the backstop need to front up what they will give up. Gibraltar? FOM? More money? Fishing?
Corbyn is absolutely right to refuse to talk to May unless she takes no deal off the table. Keeping No Deal alive is blackmail, and nobody in good conscience could be expected to negotiate where the other party is trying to blackmail you.
I would expect the other parties to similarly decline May's invitation.
Corbyn wouldn’t enter into talks with May even if No Deal were off the table. He is not interested in Brexit. He just wants power. Propping up May doesn’t help him one bit. All the talk about talks is just posturing.
This makes absolutely no sense to me. Why not go into talks with May without pre-condition? That immediately gives Labour the moral high ground. They can then come out of them and say they were pointless because she would not budge.
*HINT* : Jezza wants no deal..
I know that. He always has. But this is not a good way of controlling the narrative when it happens. He is looking to keen for one right now.
It is setting up for if there is a no deal he will blame May and say if only she has been sensible they could have talked and found unicorn poop together. The reality is he isn’t exactly working very hard to stop brexit.
The two referendum options capture the wishes only of two of the three factions, Remain and Soft Brexit, and disenfranchises Hard Brexiters. Why?
A third option remains - extension of A50 to allow the EU and UK sufficient time to make as many pragmatic and mutually acceptable arrangements for a No Deal Brexit as possible before pulling the plug.
So, my suggestion for the second referendum, to honour the first while asking for guidance on how to effect Brexit, would be between May's Deal and this option, with Remain not being an option (having already been rejected by the electorate).
The blackmail talk is among the silliest of the claims around this issue. May's actions have been pigheaded and self defeating at times, and I sure don't want no deal, but it's not blackmail to hold firm, when the other side is also holding firm. What, they'll allow no deal because she won't rule out no deal?
Well, Corbyn's strategy is to try to maximise chaos with the Tories at the wheel. If it looks as if the tin-eared automaton is going to drive the country over the cliff edge, then why would Corbyn want to stop her?
Her inhuman stubbornness and omnidirectional incompetence means she's driving us ever closer to No Deal. Stands to reason Corbyn needs her to be at the wheel when it happens, and he's doing all he can to keep her there.
Corbyn is absolutely right to refuse to talk to May unless she takes no deal off the table. Keeping No Deal alive is blackmail, and nobody in good conscience could be expected to negotiate where the other party is trying to blackmail you.
I would expect the other parties to similarly decline May's invitation.
It is pointless because no deal is not possible. The EU have said they would do time limited deals in a number of areas so May could just say I have signed these deals so there is a deal.
So, Mr Corbyn, you said you talked to the IRA and Hamas without pre-condition to find paths to peace, but you will not speak to the PM without pre-condition to try to find a way to avoid an economic catastrophe for the UK. Why? https://twitter.com/fleetstreetfox/status/1085627591678148610
Why weaken your hand and make the EU refuse further concessions. It is not going to happen until a clear alternative has been decided upon
The EU is doing a pretty fine job of refusing concessions. They have been clear. Any concessions require a quid pro quo. Those insisting on wanting movement around the backstop need to front up what they will give up. Gibraltar? FOM? More money? Fishing?
Best not to second guess but see how this evolves over the coming weeks
So, my suggestion for the second referendum, to honour the first while asking for guidance on how to effect Brexit, would be between May's Deal and this option, with Remain not being an option (having already been rejected by the electorate).
A different electorate.
Your plan would disenfranchise all voters who did not vote last last time or have changed their minds.
The two referendum options capture the wishes only of two of the three factions, Remain and Soft Brexit, and disenfranchises Hard Brexiters. Why?
A third option remains - extension of A50 to allow the EU and UK sufficient time to make as many pragmatic and mutually acceptable arrangements for a No Deal Brexit as possible before pulling the plug.
So, my suggestion for the second referendum, to honour the first while asking for guidance on how to effect Brexit, would be between May's Deal and this option, with Remain not being an option (having already been rejected by the electorate).
The blackmail talk is among the silliest of the claims around this issue. May's actions have been pigheaded and self defeating at times, and I sure don't want no deal, but it's not blackmail to hold firm, when the other side is also holding firm. What, they'll allow no deal because she won't rule out no deal?
Well, Corbyn's strategy is to try to maximise chaos with the Tories at the wheel. If it looks as if the tin-eared automaton is going to drive the country over the cliff edge, then why would Corbyn want to stop her?
Her inhuman stubbornness and omnidirectional incompetence means she's driving us ever closer to No Deal. Stands to reason Corbyn needs her to be at the wheel when it happens, and he's doing all he can to keep her there.
Of course that approach doesn't work when the economy is sailing along in 2022 and Brexit is a distant memory.
Why weaken your hand and make the EU refuse further concessions. It is not going to happen until a clear alternative has been decided upon
There is nothing strong about threatening to shoot yourself in the foot. We don’t want no deal, she doesn’t want no deal, everyone knows that so for goodness sake let’s move on. Sure the ERG will cry, but they won’t accept anything but no deal. So we lose nothing.
Why weaken your hand and make the EU refuse further concessions. It is not going to happen until a clear alternative has been decided upon
The EU will not offer further concessions. This deal is the best deal and the only deal.
You cannot know how this will evolve. That is your opinion but there are others
Big G, magic unicorns are not your style.
In my professional life I negotiated countless millions of pounds of deals and the first lesson in any deal is you do not take walking away off the table
So, my suggestion for the second referendum, to honour the first while asking for guidance on how to effect Brexit, would be between May's Deal and this option, with Remain not being an option (having already been rejected by the electorate).
A different electorate.
Your plan would disenfranchise all voters who did not vote last last time or have changed their minds.
Hardly democratic...
Not true - rejoiners could all vote LD and be back in the EU.
The door is always open to sign up again to the club.
Unlike Lewis and Woodcock who actively chose to abstain tonight, and I say this with a good deal of kindness, but Flynn really needs to resign his seat.
Do we know how sick he is? It would be sad to see a repeat of what happened in 1979, where the VonC came down to an MP who was five days from meeting his maker.
The official story is he has very severe arthritis and therefore finds it very difficult to move.
I'm starting to wonder if there's a bit more to it than that.
It’s rheumatoid arthritis, which can be absolutely debilitating. My grandmother had it.
"If you don't give us what we want, we'll stay" is a more effective threat than "if you don't give us what we want, we'll shoot ourselves in the head".
Why weaken your hand and make the EU refuse further concessions. It is not going to happen until a clear alternative has been decided upon
The EU is doing a pretty fine job of refusing concessions. They have been clear. Any concessions require a quid pro quo. Those insisting on wanting movement around the backstop need to front up what they will give up. Gibraltar? FOM? More money? Fishing?
Best not to second guess but see how this evolves over the coming weeks
It's funny, but for the last month when May and the EU said again and again and again that this was the best and only deal, you took it is absolute truth and ridiculed others who said another deal was possible.
Now, miraculously, you think the EU are lying when they carry on saying this deal is the best and only deal available?
I really hope you don't think too hard about the cognitive dissonance.
The two referendum options capture the wishes only of two of the three factions, Remain and Soft Brexit, and disenfranchises Hard Brexiters. Why?
A third option remains - extension of A50 to allow the EU and UK sufficient time to make as many pragmatic and mutually acceptable arrangements for a No Deal Brexit as possible before pulling the plug.
So, my suggestion for the second referendum, to honour the first while asking for guidance on how to effect Brexit, would be between May's Deal and this option, with Remain not being an option (having already been rejected by the electorate).
Daft. Remain is perfectly viable and should not be artificially excluded. If the people don’t want it they can say do.
The blackmail talk is among the silliest of the claims around this issue. May's actions have been pigheaded and self defeating at times, and I sure don't want no deal, but it's not blackmail to hold firm, when the other side is also holding firm. What, they'll allow no deal because she won't rule out no deal?
Well, Corbyn's strategy is to try to maximise chaos with the Tories at the wheel. If it looks as if the tin-eared automaton is going to drive the country over the cliff edge, then why would Corbyn want to stop her?
Her inhuman stubbornness and omnidirectional incompetence means she's driving us ever closer to No Deal. Stands to reason Corbyn needs her to be at the wheel when it happens, and he's doing all he can to keep her there.
Absolutely , May is certainly making a good claim to be the worst PM in living memory.
Why weaken your hand and make the EU refuse further concessions. It is not going to happen until a clear alternative has been decided upon
The EU will not offer further concessions. This deal is the best deal and the only deal.
You cannot know how this will evolve. That is your opinion but there are others
Big G, magic unicorns are not your style.
In my professional life I negotiated countless millions of pounds of deals and the first lesson in any deal is you do not take walking away off the table
No Deal is the "do as I say or I shoot myself in the head" school of negotiation. I presume you never tried anything that fucking dumb or you'd be bankrupt.
"If you don't give us what we want, we'll stay" is a more effective threat than "if you don't give us what we want, we'll shoot ourselves in the head".
They want us to stay..... so remind me how this "threat" works....
A smart way forward would be i) Repeal the FTPA ii) Make the next vote on May's deal an explicit confidence vote.
Is there a majority for either option apart from in your head?
Making May's deal an explicit confidence vote triggers either a General Election or the deal passes. It *moves things forward*. I have no idea if there is a majority for either, and that was not my argument.
Why weaken your hand and make the EU refuse further concessions. It is not going to happen until a clear alternative has been decided upon
The EU will not offer further concessions. This deal is the best deal and the only deal.
You cannot know how this will evolve. That is your opinion but there are others
Big G, magic unicorns are not your style.
In my professional life I negotiated countless millions of pounds of deals and the first lesson in any deal is you do not take walking away off the table
Walking away = the status quo. In Brexit terms, the common understanding of walking away = revocation.
So, Mr Corbyn, you said you talked to the IRA and Hamas without pre-condition to find paths to peace, but you will not speak to the PM without pre-condition to try to find a way to avoid an economic catastrophe for the UK. Why? https://twitter.com/fleetstreetfox/status/1085627591678148610
Much easier to talk to your friends than your enemies...
There will be a second referendum and Remain will win, not because of the merits of staying in, but because the Brexit debate has shown quite clearly that our MPs are not up to the job of governing Britain. Too many of them, in all parties, want to be paid for doing what Brussels tells them.
The best option by far would have negotiated a trade deal along the lines of those like Canada’s and a clean break. That opportunity has been lost. The Norway option is a dead end. It takes us out of the CAP and CFP but they weren’t the main causes that led to Leave winning originally.
It has not been lost 100%. There is a WTO provision Article 24 that says that whilst negotiating a new deal all tariffs and terms of previous trade can stay the same for a reasonable period of time whilst the new deal is being negotiated.
So if the EU and UK agree this could be invoked with no other parts of the WA in force. Solves the backstop in the short term to get Leo over the line in his next election.
"If you don't give us what we want, we'll stay" is a more effective threat than "if you don't give us what we want, we'll shoot ourselves in the head".
They want us to stay..... so remind me how this "threat" works....
They want us to change our minds. That's not quite the same thing.
Corbyn is absolutely right to refuse to talk to May unless she takes no deal off the table. Keeping No Deal alive is blackmail, and nobody in good conscience could be expected to negotiate where the other party is trying to blackmail you.
I would expect the other parties to similarly decline May's invitation.
Corbyn wouldn’t enter into talks with May even if No Deal were off the table. He is not interested in Brexit. He just wants power. Propping up May doesn’t help him one bit.
You have it the wrong way around. Corbyn is very interested in Brexit as Brexit allows a future radical left government to prop up failing industries and renationalise. Corbyn doesn't care about power. He would hate the responsibility that comes with it, Corbyn likes to snipe from the sidelines. That is what he has been doing as Leader of the Opposition and that is why he is a useless Leader of the Opposition. He can slag off the government with impunity, and if we no deal Brexit he can carp on about heartless Tories having impoverished the working classes. Useless, but certainly not power-crazed.
So, Mr Corbyn, you said you talked to the IRA and Hamas without pre-condition to find paths to peace, but you will not speak to the PM without pre-condition to try to find a way to avoid an economic catastrophe for the UK. Why? https://twitter.com/fleetstreetfox/status/1085627591678148610
Much easier to talk to your friends than your enemies...
Rees-Mogg just confirmed to Andrew Neil that he'll support Govt in a future VONC whatever May does in the Brexit negotiations.
Of course he will, as will every MP wishing to remain a member of the Conservative party.
This is the root of why the FTPA is such a problem: a decade ago, last night’s vote would have been made an issue of confidence, the equivalent of a four line whip, and would probably have passed.
It would have been very close indeed.
The Gov't would have had 325 less 10 DUP = 315. (Tories + Hermon less Laing less 2 tellers)
From 650, deduct the 7 SF members, the Speaker and the three Deputy Speakers (2 Labour and 1 Conservative) so that takes us to 639 voting members.
Nominally, CON (316) plus DUP (10) should have 326 leaving 313 "opposition" MPs but that includes 6 ex-Labour MP, Sylvia Harmon and Stephen Lloyd who are the 8 "Independent" MPs.
As there is apparently no pairing, the CON-DUP total looks light by one but if we exclude the two tellers that would suggest one Independent MP voted with the Government.
On the Opposition side, the affiliated MP total is 305 so assuming two tellers again, three of the Independents must have voted with the Opposition so four Independents must have abstained or been absent.
No doubt, details will be forthcoming.
Lady Hermon voted with the government
Unlikely she would have done so had Milliband still been Labour leader.
Why weaken your hand and make the EU refuse further concessions. It is not going to happen until a clear alternative has been decided upon
The EU will not offer further concessions. This deal is the best deal and the only deal.
You cannot know how this will evolve. That is your opinion but there are others
Big G, magic unicorns are not your style.
In my professional life I negotiated countless millions of pounds of deals and the first lesson in any deal is you do not take walking away off the table
The second is to get a win-win deal. Which the EU seem to have forgotten.
In 2049, unlocked Cabinet papers will reveal how May and Corbyn worked closely on their secret plan to ensure No Deal passed a House set against it as an outcome.....
"If you don't give us what we want, we'll stay" is a more effective threat than "if you don't give us what we want, we'll shoot ourselves in the head".
They want us to stay..... so remind me how this "threat" works....
They want us to change our minds. That's not quite the same thing.
You said
"If you don't give us what we want, we'll stay" is a more effective threat
So, Mr Corbyn, you said you talked to the IRA and Hamas without pre-condition to find paths to peace, but you will not speak to the PM without pre-condition to try to find a way to avoid an economic catastrophe for the UK. Why? https://twitter.com/fleetstreetfox/status/1085627591678148610
More stonewalling. The more he prats about, the more the clock runs down. He wants No Deal.
Why weaken your hand and make the EU refuse further concessions. It is not going to happen until a clear alternative has been decided upon
The EU will not offer further concessions. This deal is the best deal and the only deal.
You cannot know how this will evolve. That is your opinion but there are others
Big G, magic unicorns are not your style.
In my professional life I negotiated countless millions of pounds of deals and the first lesson in any deal is you do not take walking away off the table
No Deal is the "do as I say or I shoot myself in the head" school of negotiation. I presume you never tried anything that fucking dumb or you'd be bankrupt.
Apart from your unacceptable language you show no knowledge of negotiation and in virtually every case it worked often upto minutes from signing contract
Rees-Mogg just confirmed to Andrew Neil that he'll support Govt in a future VONC whatever May does in the Brexit negotiations.
Of course he will, as will every MP wishing to remain a member of the Conservative party.
This is the root of why the FTPA is such a problem: a decade ago, last night’s vote would have been made an issue of confidence, the equivalent of a four line whip, and would probably have passed.
It would have been very close indeed.
The Gov't would have had 325 less 10 DUP = 315. (Tories + Hermon less Laing less 2 tellers)
Isn't Hermon pro-Labour?
Absolubtely not, she's one of the most sensible parliamentarians there is.
Unlike Lewis and Woodcock who actively chose to abstain tonight, and I say this with a good deal of kindness, but Flynn really needs to resign his seat.
Do we know how sick he is? It would be sad to see a repeat of what happened in 1979, where the VonC came down to an MP who was five days from meeting his maker.
The official story is he has very severe arthritis and therefore finds it very difficult to move.
I'm starting to wonder if there's a bit more to it than that.
Ah okay. That doesn’t sound like something that’s likely to improve with treatment, in which case maybe it’s better that he takes the Chiltern Hundreds.
A smart way forward would be i) Repeal the FTPA ii) Make the next vote on May's deal an explicit confidence vote.
There are enough numpties in the ERG to vote against and bring down the government.
How about numpties among the pro second referendum school bringing down the government? I suspect the likes of Grieve at al will bring the gov't down to avoid a no deal scenario
Unlike Lewis and Woodcock who actively chose to abstain tonight, and I say this with a good deal of kindness, but Flynn really needs to resign his seat.
Do we know how sick he is? It would be sad to see a repeat of what happened in 1979, where the VonC came down to an MP who was five days from meeting his maker.
The official story is he has very severe arthritis and therefore finds it very difficult to move.
I'm starting to wonder if there's a bit more to it than that.
It’s rheumatoid arthritis, which can be absolutely debilitating. My grandmother had it.
Well, he is bedridden, but he also said he was determined to vote on the Brexit deal if he had to be stretchered in to the commons. And in fairness whatever the faults of the Labour left they have always been very assiduous about attending the Commons to vote and take part in debates on behalf of their constituents if humanly possible.
So I am wondering if that is the only problem or if he is now too ill to be moved.
Why weaken your hand and make the EU refuse further concessions. It is not going to happen until a clear alternative has been decided upon
The EU will not offer further concessions. This deal is the best deal and the only deal.
Until 48 hours to 29th March deadline......... It's the way they work. Always have.
It's how they work if they think you have a chance of delivering. May is clearly unable to deliver; her party want to crash out and so does the DUP, so why would anyone go out on a limb for her?
Though I do look forward to the gradually ramping chaos and panic as we move ever closer to that cliff edge, it's going to be beautiful.
Rees-Mogg just confirmed to Andrew Neil that he'll support Govt in a future VONC whatever May does in the Brexit negotiations.
Of course he will, as will every MP wishing to remain a member of the Conservative party.
This is the root of why the FTPA is such a problem: a decade ago, last night’s vote would have been made an issue of confidence, the equivalent of a four line whip, and would probably have passed.
It would have been very close indeed.
The Gov't would have had 325 less 10 DUP = 315. (Tories + Hermon less Laing less 2 tellers)
Isn't Hermon pro-Labour?
Absolubtely not, she's one of the most sensible parliamentarians there is.
I thought she ceased being pro-Tory in the wake of the "UCUNF" debacle!
Rees-Mogg just confirmed to Andrew Neil that he'll support Govt in a future VONC whatever May does in the Brexit negotiations.
Of course he will, as will every MP wishing to remain a member of the Conservative party.
This is the root of why the FTPA is such a problem: a decade ago, last night’s vote would have been made an issue of confidence, the equivalent of a four line whip, and would probably have passed.
It would have been very close indeed.
The Gov't would have had 325 less 10 DUP = 315. (Tories + Hermon less Laing less 2 tellers)
Isn't Hermon pro-Labour?
Absolubtely not, she's one of the most sensible parliamentarians there is.
She was, for a long time. In fact she resigned from the UUP over their decision to resume formal links with the Tories.
Corbyn is absolutely right to refuse to talk to May unless she takes no deal off the table. Keeping No Deal alive is blackmail, and nobody in good conscience could be expected to negotiate where the other party is trying to blackmail you.
I would expect the other parties to similarly decline May's invitation.
Corbyn is absolutely right to refuse to talk to May unless she takes no deal off the table. Keeping No Deal alive is blackmail, and nobody in good conscience could be expected to negotiate where the other party is trying to blackmail you.
I would expect the other parties to similarly decline May's invitation.
1. May can't take it off the table, because it's what has been legislated for, in the absence of a deal, 2. It 's not blackmail to hold people to their decisions, 3. Corbyn wants no deal.
Why weaken your hand and make the EU refuse further concessions. It is not going to happen until a clear alternative has been decided upon
The EU will not offer further concessions. This deal is the best deal and the only deal.
Until 48 hours to 29th March deadline......... It's the way they work. Always have.
It's how they work if they think you have a chance of delivering. May is clearly unable to deliver; her party want to crash out and so does the DUP, so why would anyone go out on a limb for her?
Though I do look forward to the gradually ramping chaos and panic as we move ever closer to that cliff edge, it's going to be beautiful.
Take away the backstop - and she can deliver......
Rees-Mogg just confirmed to Andrew Neil that he'll support Govt in a future VONC whatever May does in the Brexit negotiations.
Of course he will, as will every MP wishing to remain a member of the Conservative party.
This is the root of why the FTPA is such a problem: a decade ago, last night’s vote would have been made an issue of confidence, the equivalent of a four line whip, and would probably have passed.
It would have been very close indeed.
The Gov't would have had 325 less 10 DUP = 315. (Tories + Hermon less Laing less 2 tellers)
Isn't Hermon pro-Labour?
Absolubtely not, she's one of the most sensible parliamentarians there is.
She was, for a long time. In fact she resigned from the UUP over their decision to resume formal links with the Tories.
She seems markedly less pro-Corbyn however.
Well she is certainly supporting May and furthermore May's deal, so she is more useful than the Moggs, Heidi Allens and DUP right now to good governance.
Wot now? I say look at how we got here. To be fair to May, Cammo’s policy this will be settled once and for all with remain/leave referendum looks worst decision ever in British politics, putting out a fire by pouring petrol all over it. And some people think it’s good idea to have another one, the fire can be put out by adding even more petrol?
Whether what is Brexit is clear or not, what is role of parliament in delivering ref result? should parliament have a meaningful say, especially to fill in variances where voters were only asked to provide one dimensional answer to multifaceted outcome? We traditionally have representative democracy, a conviction it helps us achieve strong outcomes, strong as in consensual, strong as in delivering results. Let’s remind ourselves what representative democracy is. Edmund Burke (who some call Father of Conservatism): Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment; he betrays instead of serving you if he sacrifices it to your opinion. But Voxpop voters post ref what you hear is, we told them what to do, they should represent us by getting on and doing it. As both executive and parliament argue for authority to shape brexit, they have been cuffing each other with two different forms of democracy - at what point have politicians, parliament and the public actually been on same page what Brexit is, and how referendum result works alongside representative democracy?
This lack of clarity is basis of the gridlock, not normal party politics. with all this lack of clarity we can go round and round and remain the laughing stock of the world for ever. But if you listen out to the media, read political blogs, looking for this lack of clarity becoming addressed, it’s not. A crisis not going away until it is.
An interesting post.
I think the basic problem is only a small part of the population understand the issue and the complexities arising from Brexit. People, particularly vocal Leave supporting individuals seem to think the decision and method of Leaving has little consequence for Government, Parliament, Business and individuals. It is one of the paradox's about Brexit that those members of the public who complain loudest about the EU, do not seem to understand how just leaving will blow the lives apart of millions. They claim economists, trade advisors, business leaders, health managers and others are part of project fear and it will all be alright. David Cameron did make a very poor judgement in calling that referendum but the current PM has built on the foundation of his misjudgement and poured petrol on the mess that could engulf us all. Maybe fighting fire with fire is the only way out via a second referendum?
Apart from your unacceptable language you show no knowledge of negotiation and in virtually every case it worked often upto minutes from signing contract
Okay Del Boy. I'm sure your big swinging dick days are legendary. In the meantime we're talking serious stuff not you doing your Important Businessman cosplay.
Theresa May wants to hold a gun to the nation's head. Labour should not, will not be part of that.
Why weaken your hand and make the EU refuse further concessions. It is not going to happen until a clear alternative has been decided upon
The EU will not offer further concessions. This deal is the best deal and the only deal.
You cannot know how this will evolve. That is your opinion but there are others
Big G, magic unicorns are not your style.
In my professional life I negotiated countless millions of pounds of deals and the first lesson in any deal is you do not take walking away off the table
No Deal is the "do as I say or I shoot myself in the head" school of negotiation. I presume you never tried anything that fucking dumb or you'd be bankrupt.
Only because the government spent the last three years or so fannying about instead of mitigating the effects of no deal. In an alternate universe we waited for two years to serve A50 and spent that time rebuilding those neglected parts of the economy and rebuilding our regulatory and general oversight capacity, hired proper trade negotiation experts rather than dump Robbins in it. We'd have been ready for no deal and we would have had the ability to walk away, and now with the EU economy going down the pan us walking away would hurt both sides equally.
Unfortunately the PM wasted time, kicked the can down the road and the Chancellor sabotaged no deal planning as a matter of course.
So we are where we are.
I still hope Parliament sees sense and votes through the deal on the 28th of March.
Corbyn is absolutely right to refuse to talk to May unless she takes no deal off the table. Keeping No Deal alive is blackmail, and nobody in good conscience could be expected to negotiate where the other party is trying to blackmail you.
I would expect the other parties to similarly decline May's invitation.
Corbyn is absolutely right to refuse to talk to May unless she takes no deal off the table. Keeping No Deal alive is blackmail, and nobody in good conscience could be expected to negotiate where the other party is trying to blackmail you.
I would expect the other parties to similarly decline May's invitation.
1. May can't take it off the table, because it's what has been legislated for, in the absence of a deal, 2. It 's not blackmail to hold people to their decisions, 3. Corbyn wants no deal.
1. She can, it is entirely within the government's gift 2. Oh yes it is 3. He wants Tory no deal, which he is seen to oppose.
Why weaken your hand and make the EU refuse further concessions. It is not going to happen until a clear alternative has been decided upon
The EU will not offer further concessions. This deal is the best deal and the only deal.
Until 48 hours to 29th March deadline......... It's the way they work. Always have.
It's how they work if they think you have a chance of delivering. May is clearly unable to deliver; her party want to crash out and so does the DUP, so why would anyone go out on a limb for her?
Though I do look forward to the gradually ramping chaos and panic as we move ever closer to that cliff edge, it's going to be beautiful.
Take away the backstop - and she can deliver......
Isn't saying take away the backstop another way of saying no deal?
A smart way forward would be i) Repeal the FTPA ii) Make the next vote on May's deal an explicit confidence vote.
There are enough numpties in the ERG to vote against and bring down the government.
OK So we have a General Election and they're all deselected. We move forward.
Who selects Tory candidates, the Central Office or the CPs?
I always assumed voting against party position in a VONC = whip withdrawn so you couldn't stand at next GE.
Not sure it would be that successful though. If 110 stood together, particularly if their CPs were very pro-Brexit, it would be a brave Party that withdrew that many whips simultaneously. It could be shown to be an empty threat, even before there were a chance to deploy.
Comments
We have had benign Governments for hundreds of years and that creates huge dangers should the ill-willed ever take the reigns.
"I am confined to bed and have four carers a day. My wife, Sam, is wonderful and Jessica Morden [the Newport East MP] has been magnificent.”
He said Brexit was “absolute madness" but vowed to take part in a Commons vote on any Brexit deal presented to Parliament.
"I will go to the Commons on a stretcher if I have to," he added.
(BBC Wales, December)
The best option by far would have negotiated a trade deal along the lines of those like Canada’s and a clean break. That opportunity has been lost. The Norway option is a dead end. It takes us out of the CAP and CFP but they weren’t the main causes that led to Leave winning originally.
I would expect the other parties to similarly decline May's invitation.
I'm starting to wonder if there's a bit more to it than that.
The blackmail talk is among the silliest of the claims around this issue. May's actions have been pigheaded and self defeating at times, and I sure don't want no deal, but it's not blackmail to hold firm, when the other side is also holding firm. What, they'll allow no deal because she won't rule out no deal?
The Gov't would have had 325 less 10 DUP = 315. (Tories + Hermon less Laing less 2 tellers)
Opposition is trickier to calculate.
Starting from tonight's total we need to add 10 DUP. So 316.
Then what do Ivan Lewis, Frank Field, Onasunya, Flynn, Woodcock do on a vote they all know is going to a knife edge ?
We may be on a road that has no turns.
A third option remains - extension of A50 to allow the EU and UK sufficient time to make as many pragmatic and mutually acceptable arrangements for a No Deal Brexit as possible before pulling the plug.
So, my suggestion for the second referendum, to honour the first while asking for guidance on how to effect Brexit, would be between May's Deal and this option, with Remain not being an option (having already been rejected by the electorate).
Her inhuman stubbornness and omnidirectional incompetence means she's driving us ever closer to No Deal. Stands to reason Corbyn needs her to be at the wheel when it happens, and he's doing all he can to keep her there.
https://twitter.com/fleetstreetfox/status/1085627591678148610
Your plan would disenfranchise all voters who did not vote last last time or have changed their minds.
Hardly democratic...
i) Repeal the FTPA
ii) Make the next vote on May's deal an explicit confidence vote.
The door is always open to sign up again to the club.
Reminds me of Lenin's constant decimation of Communist Party ranks in the early days.
Now, miraculously, you think the EU are lying when they carry on saying this deal is the best and only deal available?
I really hope you don't think too hard about the cognitive dissonance.
Note: It would appear that the three ex-Labour abstainers/absentees tonight were John Woodcock, Ivan Lewis and Fiona Onasanya.
So if the EU and UK agree this could be invoked with no other parts of the WA in force. Solves the backstop in the short term to get Leo over the line in his next election.
"If you don't give us what we want, we'll stay" is a more effective threat
Which is bonkers putting it nicely
So I am wondering if that is the only problem or if he is now too ill to be moved.
Though I do look forward to the gradually ramping chaos and panic as we move ever closer to that cliff edge, it's going to be beautiful.
She seems markedly less pro-Corbyn however.
2. It 's not blackmail to hold people to their decisions,
3. Corbyn wants no deal.
I think the basic problem is only a small part of the population understand the issue and the complexities arising from Brexit. People, particularly vocal Leave supporting individuals seem to think the decision and method of Leaving has little consequence for Government, Parliament, Business and individuals. It is one of the paradox's about Brexit that those members of the public who complain loudest about the EU, do not seem to understand how just leaving will blow the lives apart of millions. They claim economists, trade advisors, business leaders, health managers and others are part of project fear and it will all be alright. David Cameron did make a very poor judgement in calling that referendum but the current PM has built on the foundation of his misjudgement and poured petrol on the mess that could engulf us all. Maybe fighting fire with fire is the only way out via a second referendum?
Theresa May wants to hold a gun to the nation's head. Labour should not, will not be part of that.
Unfortunately the PM wasted time, kicked the can down the road and the Chancellor sabotaged no deal planning as a matter of course.
So we are where we are.
I still hope Parliament sees sense and votes through the deal on the 28th of March.
2. Oh yes it is
3. He wants Tory no deal, which he is seen to oppose.