Can we unban @grabcocque please, there's stuff kicking off in the House of Commons again that will require detailed parliamentary knowledge and swearing.
He’s banned?! Ooooh. What did he DO?
The official reason was that he was being excessively rude to an elderly Leave supporter about his fellow Leave supporters dying, but we all know it was because he was getting TOO CLOSE TO THE TRUTH.
Can we unban @grabcocque please, there's stuff kicking off in the House of Commons again that will require detailed parliamentary knowledge and swearing.
He’s banned?! Ooooh. What did he DO?
The official reason was that he was being excessively rude to an elderly Leave supporter about his fellow Leave supporters dying, but we all know it was because he was getting TOO CLOSE TO THE TRUTH.
There wasn’t much truth in his 1000 posts on the ferry company.
Looks as if the option of a referendum has just gone up in smoke
Oh what a shame...
But probably increased the chances of revocation of Article 50.
No Tory PM could revoke and survive. Unless he or she called a GE with that in the manifesto - and then won the election. The chances of this are approximately less than zero.
The fog of war is thick. If a referendum really is ruled out, one of two impossible Brexits must now happen. Parliament accepts the Deal, or Parliament accepts No Deal.
Not a permanent revocation just a temporary one if the EU don’t allow us to extend Article 50.
Would the Tory party believe it was really only temporary, in the absence of a believable plan to make Brexit work in the future?
There isn't a believable plan to make Brexit "work". There may be plans to mitigate its inevitable damage, though none to make it work.
Your "can do" attitude is just what these negotiations need.
Negotiations are over, and the Deal is rejected. No Deal is increasingly inevitable.
Remainers seem very angry at these attempts to forge a deal and avoid a hard Brexit...
I think "Remainers" are very angry about the whole stupid process. It has achieved nothing, and will continue to achieve nothing. However, it is necessary to push ahead, IMO, as people have inadvisably voted for it, but it doesn't make it right or sensible. Damage limitation will now be everyone's responsibility. I only hope that those who advocated it (Gove, Johnson, Rees Mogg et al.) and those like Corbyn who have been duplicitous over it, eventually get their comeuppance.
Will of the People = Nothing.
Says it all......
Don't be silly. You don't know the will of the people any more than I do. You know the result of a very close referendum, which as I said, needs to be implemented. Other than that you only know the will of yourself, well maybe. Try not to speak in Daily Express clichés, it doesn't enhance your argument.
Would invoking Article 50 (again) not necessitate a vote in the Commons, which it would likely lose?
Mr. Meeks, that's my reading too. Removing revocation/referendum from immediate consideration makes it likelier an extension gets through, and more time is what those heavily pro-EU need to try and get us to Remain.
I would say not needed, if it is was in the Manifesto of a party that said it would re-invoke and that Party was then in Government. It was a clearly expressed choice that the voters had made (they would argue).
Of course, the EU could say, No, you can't leave without ANOTHER Referendum. Being the nation we are, I guess that would garner the required two-fingered salute to Brussels. Either by Parliament or in said further required referendum.
Can we unban @grabcocque please, there's stuff kicking off in the House of Commons again that will require detailed parliamentary knowledge and swearing.
He’s banned?! Ooooh. What did he DO?
The official reason was that he was being excessively rude to an elderly Leave supporter about his fellow Leave supporters dying, but we all know it was because he was getting TOO CLOSE TO THE TRUTH.
Can we unban @grabcocque please, there's stuff kicking off in the House of Commons again that will require detailed parliamentary knowledge and swearing.
He’s banned?! Ooooh. What did he DO?
The official reason was that he was being excessively rude to an elderly Leave supporter about his fellow Leave supporters dying, but we all know it was because he was getting TOO CLOSE TO THE TRUTH.
Can we unban @grabcocque please, there's stuff kicking off in the House of Commons again that will require detailed parliamentary knowledge and swearing.
He’s banned?! Ooooh. What did he DO?
Consumed alcohol and posted, late night.
Oh go on. Tell me. I’m in Bangkok. It’s too early to start drinking but I’ve finishwd writing my thriller. I’m bored. Did he go full on Rod Crosby or something?
Does mrs T not go with you when you head off to thailand to write your latest airport bestseller?
Can we unban @grabcocque please, there's stuff kicking off in the House of Commons again that will require detailed parliamentary knowledge and swearing.
He’s banned?! Ooooh. What did he DO?
The official reason was that he was being excessively rude to an elderly Leave supporter about his fellow Leave supporters dying, but we all know it was because he was getting TOO CLOSE TO THE TRUTH.
A bit early for thinking about Christmas presents, but one for Seamus’ Santa list.....
A Russian toymaker has released a board game called Our Guys in Salisbury, featuring the same cities in Europe visited by the GRU agents accused of carrying out last year’s nerve agent attack.
Asked whether he thought a board game about the Salisbury attack, in which one person died and four more were hospitalised, would offend Britons, he said: “We didn’t want to offend anyone. On the contrary, we wanted to support our countrymen who might be offended by this situation … a lot of things are said and a lot of it without any proof.”
Perhaps after the Brexit thing is largely over, Putin will also authorise a games manufacturer to produce a computer game where you attempt to influence the gullible into supporting a self-harming national referendum or presidential election.
I thought the American Democrats had already copyrighted the idea. IMHO the gullible are those who want to believe that it was a third party that managed to influence public opinion rather than they failed through their own inadequacies.
No Tory PM could revoke and survive. Unless he or she called a GE with that in the manifesto - and then won the election. The chances of this are approximately less than zero.
The fog of war is thick. If a referendum really is ruled out, one of two impossible Brexits must now happen. Parliament accepts the Deal, or Parliament accepts No Deal.
No PM of any flavour could survive No Deal.
Revoking would be the obvious choice
I know it’s what you want. On a very bad day - when Brexit is looking like a particularly violent shitshow - I might agree with you. Just end it. Enough. Pretend it never happened.
But that’s not reality. The reality is no prime minister could ever trample over democracy, indeed cancel democracy, by simply revoking. Dream on.
I think its Noel Edmonds time and deal is the hot favourite. Remarkable.
It really isn't
What do you think is? Second vote seemingly off the table. Minimal support for revocation. Strong majority in the House to avoid no deal. May, finally, showing some flexibility on concerns about her deal. The ERG getting rattled about the possibility of not getting Brexit at all. Corbyn clear that there will be a Brexit.
There are several fences still to jump but the lead is a lot more than a short head.
The Labour Amendment for a full CU needs to be voted on.
If moderate Tories/ DUP don't support that Tory shit deal or no deal (electoral disaster either way)
Tell me, Corbyn has rather laughably said he would use his negotiating skills to get "a better deal". Other than the backstop, does anyone know which bits he would negotiate that would be better? Or are we rather lacking on the detail there? Is there any documentary evidence demonstrating that said LOTO has any skills or qualifications in the field of negotiating?
COMPLETELY DIFFERENT DEAL (Permanent CU) that only TM Red Lines are in the way.
A bit early for thinking about Christmas presents, but one for Seamus’ Santa list.....
A Russian toymaker has released a board game called Our Guys in Salisbury, featuring the same cities in Europe visited by the GRU agents accused of carrying out last year’s nerve agent attack.
Asked whether he thought a board game about the Salisbury attack, in which one person died and four more were hospitalised, would offend Britons, he said: “We didn’t want to offend anyone. On the contrary, we wanted to support our countrymen who might be offended by this situation … a lot of things are said and a lot of it without any proof.”
Perhaps after the Brexit thing is largely over, Putin will also authorise a games manufacturer to produce a computer game where you attempt to influence the gullible into supporting a self-harming national referendum or presidential election.
I thought the American Democrats had already copyrighted the idea. IMHO the gullible are those who want to believe that it was a third party that managed to influence public opinion rather than they failed through their own inadequacies.
I don't think these two things are mutually exclusive.
Can we unban @grabcocque please, there's stuff kicking off in the House of Commons again that will require detailed parliamentary knowledge and swearing.
He’s banned?! Ooooh. What did he DO?
The official reason was that he was being excessively rude to an elderly Leave supporter about his fellow Leave supporters dying, but we all know it was because he was getting TOO CLOSE TO THE TRUTH.
Where are all those 1960s Trotski students now? Shouldn't there be a surge in Communist votes now thay are old.
Can we unban @grabcocque please, there's stuff kicking off in the House of Commons again that will require detailed parliamentary knowledge and swearing.
He’s banned?! Ooooh. What did he DO?
Consumed alcohol and posted, late night.
Oh go on. Tell me. I’m in Bangkok. It’s too early to start drinking but I’ve finishwd writing my thriller. I’m bored. Did he go full on Rod Crosby or something?
He just got rather gleeful that the old Brexiteers were all dying and seemed quite happy to hasten the process.....
Which caused some angst for Big_G, who had lost two very close aged friends that past week.
And people rather sided with Big_G.
Anyway, more importantly, off to a Michael Wignall special tasting menu in St. Mawes this weekend. Hoping he still has the magic. Will find out how his refit of The Angel Inn, Hetton is coming along.
Can we unban @grabcocque please, there's stuff kicking off in the House of Commons again that will require detailed parliamentary knowledge and swearing.
He’s banned?! Ooooh. What did he DO?
Consumed alcohol and posted, late night.
Oh go on. Tell me. I’m in Bangkok. It’s too early to start drinking but I’ve finishwd writing my thriller. I’m bored. Did he go full on Rod Crosby or something?
Can we unban @grabcocque please, there's stuff kicking off in the House of Commons again that will require detailed parliamentary knowledge and swearing.
He’s banned?! Ooooh. What did he DO?
The official reason was that he was being excessively rude to an elderly Leave supporter about his fellow Leave supporters dying, but we all know it was because he was getting TOO CLOSE TO THE TRUTH.
A bit early for thinking about Christmas presents, but one for Seamus’ Santa list.....
A Russian toymaker has released a board game called Our Guys in Salisbury, featuring the same cities in Europe visited by the GRU agents accused of carrying out last year’s nerve agent attack.
Asked whether he thought a board game about the Salisbury attack, in which one person died and four more were hospitalised, would offend Britons, he said: “We didn’t want to offend anyone. On the contrary, we wanted to support our countrymen who might be offended by this situation … a lot of things are said and a lot of it without any proof.”
Perhaps after the Brexit thing is largely over, Putin will also authorise a games manufacturer to produce a computer game where you attempt to influence the gullible into supporting a self-harming national referendum or presidential election.
I thought the American Democrats had already copyrighted the idea. IMHO the gullible are those who want to believe that it was a third party that managed to influence public opinion rather than they failed through their own inadequacies.
If you are right then clearly Putin must be very gullible as he has spent a lot of money on digital manipulation, as do many multinational companies. You obviously know more than the GRU and most of the multi-million dollar digital marketing industry. You must be very clever indeed.
Can we unban @grabcocque please, there's stuff kicking off in the House of Commons again that will require detailed parliamentary knowledge and swearing.
He’s banned?! Ooooh. What did he DO?
Consumed alcohol and posted, late night.
Oh go on. Tell me. I’m in Bangkok. It’s too early to start drinking but I’ve finishwd writing my thriller. I’m bored. Did he go full on Rod Crosby or something?
And..."too early to start drinking"? Too early in the sense of not yet February, I take it?
No Tory PM could revoke and survive. Unless he or she called a GE with that in the manifesto - and then won the election. The chances of this are approximately less than zero.
The fog of war is thick. If a referendum really is ruled out, one of two impossible Brexits must now happen. Parliament accepts the Deal, or Parliament accepts No Deal.
No PM of any flavour could survive No Deal.
Revoking would be the obvious choice
I know it’s what you want. On a very bad day - when Brexit is looking like a particularly violent shitshow - I might agree with you. Just end it. Enough. Pretend it never happened.
But that’s not reality. The reality is no prime minister could ever trample over democracy, indeed cancel democracy, by simply revoking. Dream on.
I think its Noel Edmonds time and deal is the hot favourite. Remarkable.
It really isn't
What do you think is? Second vote seemingly off the table. Minimal support for revocation. Strong majority in the House to avoid no deal. May, finally, showing some flexibility on concerns about her deal. The ERG getting rattled about the possibility of not getting Brexit at all. Corbyn clear that there will be a Brexit.
There are several fences still to jump but the lead is a lot more than a short head.
The Labour Amendment for a full CU needs to be voted on.
If moderate Tories/ DUP don't support that Tory shit deal or no deal (electoral disaster either way)
Tell me, Corbyn has rather laughably said he would use his negotiating skills to get "a better deal". Other than the backstop, does anyone know which bits he would negotiate that would be better? Or are we rather lacking on the detail there? Is there any documentary evidence demonstrating that said LOTO has any skills or qualifications in the field of negotiating?
I’d discount the negotiating skills, but if he starts by abandoning May’s fictional version of what leave voters were voting for then a different deal emerges immediately. Unacceptable to many in the house in different ways, but depending on result of the hypothetical election that leads to this point, potentially supported by a majority.
Fundamentally, if we have a Parliament with a large majority against severe economic disruption, a reasonable majority against FoM, and a small majority against any additional differentiation between U.K. and NI, no version of leaving gets supported.
Looks as if the option of a referendum has just gone up in smoke
Oh what a shame...
But probably increased the chances of revocation of Article 50.
No Tory PM could revoke and survive. Unless he or she called a GE with that in the manifesto - and then won the election. The chances of this are approximately less than zero.
The fog of war is thick. If a referendum really is ruled out, one of two impossible Brexits must now happen. Parliament accepts the Deal, or Parliament accepts No Deal.
Not a permanent revocation just a temporary one if the EU don’t allow us to extend Article 50.
Would the Tory party believe it was really only temporary, in the absence of a believable plan to make Brexit work in the future?
There isn't a believable plan to make Brexit "work". There may be plans to mitigate its inevitable damage, though none to make it work.
Your "can do" attitude is just what these negotiations need.
Negotiations are over, and the Deal is rejected. No Deal is increasingly inevitable.
Remainers seem very angry at these attempts to forge a deal and avoid a hard Brexit...
I think "Remainers" are very angry about the whole stupid process. It has achieved nothing, and will continue to achieve nothing. However, it is necessary to push ahead, IMO, as people have inadvisably voted for it, but it doesn't make it right or sensible. Damage limitation will now be everyone's responsibility. I only hope that those who advocated it (Gove, Johnson, Rees Mogg et al.) and those like Corbyn who have been duplicitous over it, eventually get their comeuppance.
Will of the People = Nothing.
Says it all......
Don't be silly. You don't know the will of the people any more than I do. You know the result of a very close referendum, which as I said, needs to be implemented. Other than that you only know the will of yourself, well maybe. Try not to speak in Daily Express clichés, it doesn't enhance your argument.
I'm wondering about advising those who favour a No Deal Brexit about how they could arrange their personal finances and household trading arrangements so they can enjoy a similar experience in their home. I want to be as realistic as possible without playing punitive and being silly.
Thoughts.
Question not thought: is this exercise the best use of your time?
Yes. A good use of all our time to plan and act now. Thanks for the help Pro.
I think how to plan for the hard Brexit future is a fair question, so I will have a go.
I see two distinct stages. The first part of managing the disorderly nature of the change is quite separate from what brexit means in long term. We have never been out the EU (formed by Britain and others early nineties) we have spent decades and hundreds of billions aligning Britain industry and business to a frictionless model, the question there is not what a nation like Britain should be capable of in 2019 but what capability we have shut down because it was cheaper to import it.
The second stage, that actually defines Brexit, is where some feel it will make us poorer and so diminish us in the world, others feel the opposite, and it depends who is right. If over time investment in Britain does drop off in a way we cannot correspondingly mitigate with freedoms and control we have taken back, then we turn to the doughnut, that I think we have Osborne to thank for? The one we all get tells us how government money is spent. In a Brexit not going well scenario all government departments would take a hit, unless for political reasons they get a ring fence. The two biggest blocks on the doughnut are welfare and pensions, so those are where biggest savings can be found, for example anyone in civil service can ignore anything the pension scheme currently telling them they will get, because it wont be that. If Brexit doesn’t go well I think its fair to assume in future if you want your family to have education and skills training they need you should be prepared to fork out for it, if you want your family to have the health care and social care they need you will have to fork out for it and not rely on the state. Ironically its the poorer areas of UK that delivered Brexit vote who could take biggest hit if it doesn’t go well.
No Tory PM could revoke and survive. Unless he or she called a GE with that in the manifesto - and then won the election. The chances of this are approximately less than zero.
The fog of war is thick. If a referendum really is ruled out, one of two impossible Brexits must now happen. Parliament accepts the Deal, or Parliament accepts No Deal.
No PM of any flavour could survive No Deal.
Revoking would be the obvious choice
I know it’s what you want. On a very bad day - when Brexit is looking like a particularly violent shitshow - I might agree with you. Just end it. Enough. Pretend it never happened.
But that’s not reality. The reality is no prime minister could ever trample over democracy, indeed cancel democracy, by simply revoking. Dream on.
I think its Noel Edmonds time and deal is the hot favourite. Remarkable.
It really isn't
What do you think is? Second vote seemingly off the table. Minimal support for revocation. Strong majority in the House to avoid no deal. May, finally, showing some flexibility on concerns about her deal. The ERG getting rattled about the possibility of not getting Brexit at all. Corbyn clear that there will be a Brexit.
There are several fences still to jump but the lead is a lot more than a short head.
The Labour Amendment for a full CU needs to be voted on.
If moderate Tories/ DUP don't support that Tory shit deal or no deal (electoral disaster either way)
Tell me, Corbyn has rather laughably said he would use his negotiating skills to get "a better deal". Other than the backstop, does anyone know which bits he would negotiate that would be better? Or are we rather lacking on the detail there? Is there any documentary evidence demonstrating that said LOTO has any skills or qualifications in the field of negotiating?
COMPLETELY DIFFERENT DEAL (Permanent CU) that only TM Red Lines are in the way.
EU offered 22 months ago
No they didn't. They offered 'a' customs union not 'The' customs union. They are very different things.
Can we unban @grabcocque please, there's stuff kicking off in the House of Commons again that will require detailed parliamentary knowledge and swearing.
He’s banned?! Ooooh. What did he DO?
Celebrated the Feast of St Gammon's Day on 19th Jan when (statistically speaking and according to Briefcase Wanker John Curtice) enough leavers had megged it through old age and diet of oven chips to eliminate the leave/remain margin of the referendum. It was quite funny but a few people got sand in their vaginas over it. You'd have enjoyed it.
Can we unban @grabcocque please, there's stuff kicking off in the House of Commons again that will require detailed parliamentary knowledge and swearing.
He’s banned?! Ooooh. What did he DO?
Consumed alcohol and posted, late night.
I thought consumption of alcohol and posting late night were compulsory on PB?
Looks as if the option of a referendum has just gone up in smoke
Oh what a shame...
But probably increased the chances of revocation of Article 50.
No Tory PM could revoke and survive. Unless he or she called a GE with that in the manifesto - and then won the election. The chances of this are approximately less than zero.
The fog of war is thick. If a referendum really is ruled out, one of two impossible Brexits must now happen. Parliament accepts the Deal, or Parliament accepts No Deal.
Not a permanent revocation just a temporary one if the EU don’t allow us to extend Article 50.
Would the Tory party believe it was really only temporary, in the absence of a believable plan to make Brexit work in the future?
There isn't a believable plan to make Brexit "work". There may be plans to mitigate its inevitable damage, though none to make it work.
Your "can do" attitude is just what these negotiations need.
Negotiations are over, and the Deal is rejected. No Deal is increasingly inevitable.
Remainers seem very angry at these attempts to forge a deal and avoid a hard Brexit...
No Tory PM could revoke and survive. Unless he or she called a GE with that in the manifesto - and then won the election. The chances of this are approximately less than zero.
The fog of war is thick. If a referendum really is ruled out, one of two impossible Brexits must now happen. Parliament accepts the Deal, or Parliament accepts No Deal.
No PM of any flavour could survive No Deal.
Revoking would be the obvious choice
I know it’s what you want. On a very bad day - when Brexit is looking like a particularly violent shitshow - I might agree with you. Just end it. Enough. Pretend it never happened.
But that’s not reality. The reality is no prime minister could ever trample over democracy, indeed cancel democracy, by simply revoking. Dream on.
I don't think that there is any doubt that the uncertainty caused by Brexit has caused at least a pause in investment and the sooner things are resolved the better. That is particularly so given the fragile state of the EZ and the negative trade winds from China and the USA. It is one of the reasons that I would be opposed to any continuation of the Article 50 period for anything other than the most technical of reasons where everyone knew where they stood. The uncertainty is worse than almost any possible outcome because you cannot plan.
No Deal does not create certainty, or anything close to it, because it is not the end position. The only way to get certainty is to sign a deal. That is what May has going for her.
Up to a point. the WA is not the final deal (not that we will ever have a "final deal" with the EU). But an agreed departure where we have paid our debts and agreed terms greatly improves the prospects of a satisfactory trade agreement once we have left. Leaving with no deal makes such a trade deal a somewhat distant prospect. That makes the argument for May's deal with whatever amendments we can get away with a no brainer for me.
David, "No brain(er)" is an apt description of May's deal that is not a deal
Not sure what the precedent/rulebook is here, or whether that matters these days, but given that it’s a wrecking amendment with tacit government support my guess is that he will not select it until it’s adopted by the government - which doesn’t seem immediately unreasonable.
Pardon my naïvity, but why is it a wrecking amendment?
It’s not completely clear (to me at least) what the status of this next motion is, but the original ‘meaningful’ vote was to accept the withdrawal agreement, so an amendment saying ‘we won’t accept the WA but we’d accept something different’ defeats the purpose of the motion - whereas an amendment saying ‘we will accept the WA and we will also do x, y and z’ would be in keeping with the motion but have an effect on what happens next. I don’t think it’s black and white, but given the power the government has (had?) over the business of the house, it’s seen as not quite proper for the government to hide behind backbench amendments in this way rather than making its intentions clear.
Comments
Of course, the EU could say, No, you can't leave without ANOTHER Referendum. Being the nation we are, I guess that would garner the required two-fingered salute to Brussels. Either by Parliament or in said further required referendum.
Since when was Big G a leave supporter?
EU offered 22 months ago
Which caused some angst for Big_G, who had lost two very close aged friends that past week.
And people rather sided with Big_G.
Anyway, more importantly, off to a Michael Wignall special tasting menu in St. Mawes this weekend. Hoping he still has the magic. Will find out how his refit of The Angel Inn, Hetton is coming along.
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2019/01/18/some-comfort-for-tmay-from-yougov-56-of-those-poll-have-felt-sympathy-for-her/
What's the latest thriller called?
Fundamentally, if we have a Parliament with a large majority against severe economic disruption, a reasonable majority against FoM, and a small majority against any additional differentiation between U.K. and NI, no version of leaving gets supported.
All you can point to is your dick.
Silly? No? Offensive? Yes. Piss off.
I think how to plan for the hard Brexit future is a fair question, so I will have a go.
I see two distinct stages. The first part of managing the disorderly nature of the change is quite separate from what brexit means in long term. We have never been out the EU (formed by Britain and others early nineties) we have spent decades and hundreds of billions aligning Britain industry and business to a frictionless model, the question there is not what a nation like Britain should be capable of in 2019 but what capability we have shut down because it was cheaper to import it.
The second stage, that actually defines Brexit, is where some feel it will make us poorer and so diminish us in the world, others feel the opposite, and it depends who is right. If over time investment in Britain does drop off in a way we cannot correspondingly mitigate with freedoms and control we have taken back, then we turn to the doughnut, that I think we have Osborne to thank for? The one we all get tells us how government money is spent. In a Brexit not going well scenario all government departments would take a hit, unless for political reasons they get a ring fence. The two biggest blocks on the doughnut are welfare and pensions, so those are where biggest savings can be found, for example anyone in civil service can ignore anything the pension scheme currently telling them they will get, because it wont be that. If Brexit doesn’t go well I think its fair to assume in future if you want your family to have education and skills training they need you should be prepared to fork out for it, if you want your family to have the health care and social care they need you will have to fork out for it and not rely on the state. Ironically its the poorer areas of UK that delivered Brexit vote who could take biggest hit if it doesn’t go well.
Can I be more fairer and balanced than that?
gilets jaunes to contest European elections
http://www.lefigaro.fr/politique/le-scan/2019/01/23/25001-20190123ARTFIG00274-europeennes-une-premiere-liste-gilets-jaunes-conduite-par-ingrid-levavasseur-presentee.php
https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1088397448547057664
https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1088397541379579904
NEW THREAD
Gosh... slow news day or scraping the barrel?