Emily Thornberry is a value bet for next Labour leader, and she's achieved it by finding a way to be acceptable in the sight of both Corbynistas and centrists.
She's figured out how to straddle those two stools successfully when so many in the PLP have failed.
This kind of thing, however, suggests she's decided to collapse the wavefunction and she needs to make sure she's inoculated against the worst excesses of Corbyn.
She needs 20 or 30 Labour votes, that's enough to require an actual understanding, not less. Whether it's a "deal" I guess depends whether you think only Corbyn can make a deal.
Any Labour MP who aids and abets the delivery of a hard Tory Brexit will not only be ending their career, but will be ensuring their names get written in blood in the annals of the very worst traitors to the movement. And the judgment of the movement on those quisling fucks will be as nothing compared to the monstering that Labour voters will deliver unto them.
It's not a thing any sane Labour MP with serious hopes of remaining such after the next election will seriously contemplate.
I needed a good laugh this morning, thanks.
Of course this sounds exactly like what Jeremy Corbyn is doing i.e. aiding and abetting the delivery of a hard Tory Brexit. He may not support it but he is seemingly aiding and abetting it!
Will his name get written in blood in the annals of the 'very worst traitors of the Labour movement' and will he be regarded as a 'qusiling 'f**k'.
Mrs May's deal is of course pretty much compatible with the Labour 2017 manifesto - surely its more traitorous to betray your voters by reneging on the promises you made. Particularly if you represent a leave voting seat and promised you would respect your constituent's views. Islington North of course is not one of those type of seats!
She needs 20 or 30 Labour votes, that's enough to require an actual understanding, not less. Whether it's a "deal" I guess depends whether you think only Corbyn can make a deal.
Any Labour MP who aids and abets the delivery of a hard Tory Brexit will not only be ending their career, but will be ensuring their names get written in blood in the annals of the very worst traitors to the movement. And the judgment of the movement on those quisling fucks will be as nothing compared to the monstering that Labour voters will deliver unto them.
It's not a thing any sane Labour MP with serious hopes of remaining such after the next election will seriously contemplate.
Can parliament vote for itself to have a secret ballot?
The idea of Parliament sneaking itself a vote to unilaterally overturn the referendum result, totally anonymously, is both cowardly and absolutely disgusting.
It's no surprise someone like you supports it.
It's entirely in keeping with your contemptuous, pompous and conceited globalist fundamentalist absolutism, which exhibits a zeal even William Glenn would struggle to match.
Um, we weren't talking about parliament overturning the referendum result, we were talking about giving cover to Labour MPs to vote for the Tory Brexit...
I do not believe there is any deal that Nadine Dorries would agree to.
Her thought process is - essentially - "If the EU is agreeing to this, we must be being screwed over."
And this is the fundamental problem that Mrs May has. There are 20 complete idiots in the ERG, who probably won't vote for anything. So, while time limiting the backstop - or allowing an independent body to adjudge whether the EU was acting in good faith in trying to implement a technological solution - would be enough for the DUP and 60-odd Conservative rebels, it probably still isn't enough.
So... what next?
To be fair, some of the EU's rhetoric over the backstop in the past two weeks has made even me question my previous support for the WA.
They've dismissed out of hand every possible alternative to the NI backstop, except a full permanent customs union, which they seem remarkably keen on, and I'm not convinced they're negotiating in good faith.
She doesn't even need to do a deal; she just needs to make an offer that enough Labour MPs can accept.
In fact, I think she'd have to adopt that approach because I doubt that Corbyn would ever do a deal with Tories.
If I had to guess, I'd say the most likely outcome at present is that the WA passes with additional workers and environmental rights, and a permanent customs union for goods, with the backstop only applying to NI wrt. single market rules for goods and agriculture. Maybe the UK could get some extra wording in the political declaration that it'd be consulted on any future trade deals the EU made that involved its customs territory too.
I'd expect about 90 Tory MPs to still vote against this, but perhaps 50 Labour MPs to come on board.
That'd get her up to about 275 votes. She'd either need a lot of abstentions on both sides, or Corbyn to whip the WA for it to pass as otherwise she'd still have 355 votes or so against it.
Far more than 90 Tory MPs will baulk at a permanent CU for goods. They might not all vote against, but many will abstain.
A CU and no SM is an absurdist compromise that is the worst of all worlds.
It directly contravenes what May promised during her Lancaster House speech It directly contradicts the Tory manifesto It directly contradicts her instructions from Parliament It is diametrically opposed to what most Tory leavers want It doesn't obviate the need for a backstop It doesn't meet Labour's six tests.
To whom, exactly, is such a ridiculous "compromise" meant to appeal?
People apart from "most Tory leavers" and Jeremy Corbyn?
Mrs May's deal is of course pretty much compatible with the Labour 2017 manifesto - surely its more traitorous to betray your voters by reneging on the promises you made. Particularly if you represent a leave voting seat and promised you would respect your constituent's views. Islington North of course is not one of those type of seats!
Okay, let's see what Labour's manifesto actually says, shall we, rather than what you want to pretend it says?
We will scrap the Conservatives’ Brexit White Paper and replace it with fresh negotiating priorities that have a strong emphasis on retaining the benefits of the Single Market and the Customs Union – which are essential for maintaining industries, jobs and businesses in Britain. Labour will always put jobs and the economy first.
A Conservative Brexit will weaken workers’ rights, deregulate the economy, slash corporate taxes, sideline Parliament and democratic accountability, and cut Britain off from our closest allies and most important trading partners.
Labour recognises that leaving the EU with ‘no deal’ is the worst possible deal for Britain and that it would do damage to our economy and trade. We will reject ‘no deal’ as a viable option and, if needs be, negotiate transitional arrangements to avoid a ‘cliff-edge’ for the UK economy.
If you think that "sounds like" or is in any way compatible with the Maybot's execration of a Brexit, I strongly suggest that perhaps your comprehension is lacking.
Or revoke - and it's anyone's guess which way May will turn after the next vote gets shot down...
There is no majority in the House of Commons for unilateral revocation.
I doubt this would happen even at 10.59pm on 29th March with No Deal seconds away.
She wouldn't need HoC consent to write a letter revoking A50. She could just do it.
She has said that she will not allow No Deal. Now I know she has in the past said one thing and done another but this would be one hell of a call.
Personally, I think she would revoke, but nobody will know until the situation arises.
You are wrong. You fundamentally misunderstand her.
She will not revoke. She may punt it out another couple of months, but she will never revoke.
Well I don't know her, so it wouldn't be surprising if I misunderstood her!
She could soon be caught between No Deal and Revoke. As I said, I can't read her mind but my guess is Revoke would be the lesser of two evils to her. Note that in NI today she said that a Hard Border will not happen. That would imply Revoke rather than No Deal, but I don't know. I don't think you do either.
Maybe she'll call a GE as her 'get out of jail card'. There are innumerable problems with that too but it might get her off the hook to some extent.
I do not believe there is any deal that Nadine Dorries would agree to.
Her thought process is - essentially - "If the EU is agreeing to this, we must be being screwed over."
And this is the fundamental problem that Mrs May has. There are 20 complete idiots in the ERG, who probably won't vote for anything. So, while time limiting the backstop - or allowing an independent body to adjudge whether the EU was acting in good faith in trying to implement a technological solution - would be enough for the DUP and 60-odd Conservative rebels, it probably still isn't enough.
So... what next?
To be fair, some of the EU's rhetoric over the backstop in the past two weeks has made even me question my previous support for the WA.
They've dismissed out of hand every possible alternative to the NI backstop, except a full permanent customs union, which they seem remarkably keen on, and I'm not convinced they're negotiating in good faith.
Or revoke - and it's anyone's guess which way May will turn after the next vote gets shot down...
There is no majority in the House of Commons for unilateral revocation.
I doubt this would happen even at 10.59pm on 29th March with No Deal seconds away.
She wouldn't need HoC consent to write a letter revoking A50. She could just do it.
She has said that she will not allow No Deal. Now I know she has in the past said one thing and done another but this would be one hell of a call.
Personally, I think she would revoke, but nobody will know until the situation arises.
You are wrong. You fundamentally misunderstand her.
She will not revoke. She may punt it out another couple of months, but she will never revoke.
Well I don't know her, so it wouldn't be surprising if I misunderstood her!
She could soon be caught between No Deal and Revoke. As I said, I can't read her mind but my guess is Revoke would be the lesser of two evils to her. Note that in NI today she said that a Hard Border will not happen. That would imply Revoke rather than No Deal, but I don't know. I don't think you do either.
Maybe she'll call a GE as her 'get out of jail card'. There are innumerable problems with that too but it might get her off the hook to some extent.
I really, really don't get why people think the EU will allow us to extend for the sake of it - what is in it for Spain etc?
She needs 20 or 30 Labour votes, that's enough to require an actual understanding, not less. Whether it's a "deal" I guess depends whether you think only Corbyn can make a deal.
Any Labour MP who aids and abets the delivery of a hard Tory Brexit will not only be ending their career, but will be ensuring their names get written in blood in the annals of the very worst traitors to the movement. And the judgment of the movement on those quisling fucks will be as nothing compared to the monstering that Labour voters will deliver unto them.
It's not a thing any sane Labour MP with serious hopes of remaining such after the next election will seriously contemplate.
Can parliament vote for itself to have a secret ballot?
The idea of Parliament sneaking itself a vote to unilaterally overturn the referendum result, totally anonymously, is both cowardly and absolutely disgusting.
It's no surprise someone like you supports it.
It's entirely in keeping with your contemptuous, pompous and conceited globalist fundamentalist absolutism, which exhibits a zeal even William Glenn would struggle to match.
Um, we weren't talking about parliament overturning the referendum result, we were talking about giving cover to Labour MPs to vote for the Tory Brexit...
We all know what you really meant.
Save the twisting and innuendo for when you become an MP.
She could soon be caught between No Deal and Revoke. As I said, I can't read her mind but my guess is Revoke would be the lesser of two evils to her. Note that in NI today she said that a Hard Border will not happen. That would imply Revoke rather than No Deal, but I don't know. I don't think you do either.
I don't think she does, either. If she had a plan for getting out of this mess, you'd think it'd have been put into operation by now.
Instead all we've had is delay, dither, displace, delude.
She could soon be caught between No Deal and Revoke. As I said, I can't read her mind but my guess is Revoke would be the lesser of two evils to her. Note that in NI today she said that a Hard Border will not happen. That would imply Revoke rather than No Deal, but I don't know. I don't think you do either.
I don't think she does, either. If she had a plan for getting out of this mess, you'd think it'd have been put into operation by now.
Instead all we've had is delay, dither, displace, delude.
Or revoke - and it's anyone's guess which way May will turn after the next vote gets shot down...
There is no majority in the House of Commons for unilateral revocation.
I doubt this would happen even at 10.59pm on 29th March with No Deal seconds away.
She wouldn't need HoC consent to write a letter revoking A50. She could just do it.
She has said that she will not allow No Deal. Now I know she has in the past said one thing and done another but this would be one hell of a call.
Personally, I think she would revoke, but nobody will know until the situation arises.
You are wrong. You fundamentally misunderstand her.
She will not revoke. She may punt it out another couple of months, but she will never revoke.
Well I don't know her, so it wouldn't be surprising if I misunderstood her!
She could soon be caught between No Deal and Revoke. As I said, I can't read her mind but my guess is Revoke would be the lesser of two evils to her. Note that in NI today she said that a Hard Border will not happen. That would imply Revoke rather than No Deal, but I don't know. I don't think you do either.
Maybe she'll call a GE as her 'get out of jail card'. There are innumerable problems with that too but it might get her off the hook to some extent.
I really, really don't get why people think the EU will allow us to extend for the sake of it - what is in it for Spain etc?
Did you get this "for the sake of it" argument from the Daily Mail? Perhaps you can explain how a withdrawal agreement (and associated legislation) is going to get through parliament and the EU in six weeks?
Or revoke - and it's anyone's guess which way May will turn after the next vote gets shot down...
There is no majority in the House of Commons for unilateral revocation.
I doubt this would happen even at 10.59pm on 29th March with No Deal seconds away.
She wouldn't need HoC consent to write a letter revoking A50. She could just do it.
She has said that she will not allow No Deal. Now I know she has in the past said one thing and done another but this would be one hell of a call.
Personally, I think she would revoke, but nobody will know until the situation arises.
You are wrong. You fundamentally misunderstand her.
She will not revoke. She may punt it out another couple of months, but she will never revoke.
Well I don't know her, so it wouldn't be surprising if I misunderstood her!
She could soon be caught between No Deal and Revoke. As I said, I can't read her mind but my guess is Revoke would be the lesser of two evils to her. Note that in NI today she said that a Hard Border will not happen. That would imply Revoke rather than No Deal, but I don't know. I don't think you do either.
Maybe she'll call a GE as her 'get out of jail card'. There are innumerable problems with that too but it might get her off the hook to some extent.
I really, really don't get why people think the EU will allow us to extend for the sake of it - what is in it for Spain etc?
The indications are that they would extend for a good reason. A GE or second referendum would almost certainly qualify, as too would some minor delay to sort out a few administrative details.
I don't see them extending so that we can try to renegotiate the WA.
Or revoke - and it's anyone's guess which way May will turn after the next vote gets shot down...
There is no majority in the House of Commons for unilateral revocation.
I doubt this would happen even at 10.59pm on 29th March with No Deal seconds away.
She wouldn't need HoC consent to write a letter revoking A50. She could just do it.
She has said that she will not allow No Deal. Now I know she has in the past said one thing and done another but this would be one hell of a call.
Personally, I think she would revoke, but nobody will know until the situation arises.
You are wrong. You fundamentally misunderstand her.
She will not revoke. She may punt it out another couple of months, but she will never revoke.
Well I don't know her, so it wouldn't be surprising if I misunderstood her!
She could soon be caught between No Deal and Revoke. As I said, I can't read her mind but my guess is Revoke would be the lesser of two evils to her. Note that in NI today she said that a Hard Border will not happen. That would imply Revoke rather than No Deal, but I don't know. I don't think you do either.
Maybe she'll call a GE as her 'get out of jail card'. There are innumerable problems with that too but it might get her off the hook to some extent.
I really, really don't get why people think the EU will allow us to extend for the sake of it - what is in it for Spain etc?
Did you get this "for the sake of it" argument from the Daily Mail? Perhaps you can explain how a withdrawal agreement (and associated legislation) is going to get through parliament and the EU in six weeks?
"For the sake of it" was because in the scenario being discussed the UK doesn't have a finalised position.
It's one thing for a delay while the paperwork is sorted out, it's another thing entirely to have a delay while the UK continues to decide what it wants to do...
She could soon be caught between No Deal and Revoke. As I said, I can't read her mind but my guess is Revoke would be the lesser of two evils to her. Note that in NI today she said that a Hard Border will not happen. That would imply Revoke rather than No Deal, but I don't know. I don't think you do either.
I don't think she does, either. If she had a plan for getting out of this mess, you'd think it'd have been put into operation by now.
Instead all we've had is delay, dither, displace, delude.
She is still seeking a deal that she can get through parliament. I don't think she's particularly bothered what deal that is, although she is still clearly attached to the one she's already negotiated. There's probably two main reasons for that attachment: firstly, she is, in her own style, excessively committed to an announced policy (see 'Nothing Has Changed'); but also, the great advantage of the WA v1.0 is that it is deliverable within the EU in a way that nothing else can be sure to be and a lot of speculated solutions are probably sure not to be.
Having said all that, I disagree that Revoke is an option. I don't think that she could do it politically and it's questionable as to whether she could do it legally without new legislation.
Or revoke - and it's anyone's guess which way May will turn after the next vote gets shot down...
There is no majority in the House of Commons for unilateral revocation.
I doubt this would happen even at 10.59pm on 29th March with No Deal seconds away.
She wouldn't need HoC consent to write a letter revoking A50. She could just do it.
She has said that she will not allow No Deal. Now I know she has in the past said one thing and done another but this would be one hell of a call.
Personally, I think she would revoke, but nobody will know until the situation arises.
You are wrong. You fundamentally misunderstand her.
She will not revoke. She may punt it out another couple of months, but she will never revoke.
Well I don't know her, so it wouldn't be surprising if I misunderstood her!
She could soon be caught between No Deal and Revoke. As I said, I can't read her mind but my guess is Revoke would be the lesser of two evils to her. Note that in NI today she said that a Hard Border will not happen. That would imply Revoke rather than No Deal, but I don't know. I don't think you do either.
Maybe she'll call a GE as her 'get out of jail card'. There are innumerable problems with that too but it might get her off the hook to some extent.
I really, really don't get why people think the EU will allow us to extend for the sake of it - what is in it for Spain etc?
The indications are that they would extend for a good reason. A GE or second referendum would almost certainly qualify, as too would some minor delay to sort out a few administrative details.
I don't see them extending so that we can try to renegotiate the WA.
An extension for a second referendum doesn't work if it goes beyond July - the new European parliament would cause problems there.
An extension for a second referendum doesn't work if it goes beyond July - the new European parliament would cause problems there.
You never know for sure but I'm pretty sure they'd suck it up - the European Parliament might not like the new seat allocations getting delayed but they don't have a veto on an extension.
He just repeated the same words at his press conference with Varadkar.
I didn't think it had - but it seems a rather unfortunate turn of phrase for the President of the European Council - more like what you would expect to see from an opinion piece in the Indy or Guardian.
He cannot have said that in all honesty. If he has he owes 17.5 million an apology
Why? It looks like a sober statement judging by the clowns who at every stage have pushed for Brexit without a clue what they want or how to achieve it.
Or revoke - and it's anyone's guess which way May will turn after the next vote gets shot down...
There is no majority in the House of Commons for unilateral revocation.
I doubt this would happen even at 10.59pm on 29th March with No Deal seconds away.
She wouldn't need HoC consent to write a letter revoking A50. She could just do it.
She has said that she will not allow No Deal. Now I know she has in the past said one thing and done another but this would be one hell of a call.
Personally, I think she would revoke, but nobody will know until the situation arises.
You are wrong. You fundamentally misunderstand her.
She will not revoke. She may punt it out another couple of months, but she will never revoke.
Well I don't know her, so it wouldn't be surprising if I misunderstood her!
She could soon be caught between No Deal and Revoke. As I said, I can't read her mind but my guess is Revoke would be the lesser of two evils to her. Note that in NI today she said that a Hard Border will not happen. That would imply Revoke rather than No Deal, but I don't know. I don't think you do either.
Maybe she'll call a GE as her 'get out of jail card'. There are innumerable problems with that too but it might get her off the hook to some extent.
I really, really don't get why people think the EU will allow us to extend for the sake of it - what is in it for Spain etc?
The indications are that they would extend for a good reason. A GE or second referendum would almost certainly qualify, as too would some minor delay to sort out a few administrative details.
I don't see them extending so that we can try to renegotiate the WA.
I must admit, only a change of PM and/or govt seems to be the only way the UK can credibly ask for a meaningful extension of A50....I cant imagine warm words in Brussels tomorrow - could be we be facing a crunch moment tomorrow? (although we have had enough so far)
The indications are that they would extend for a good reason. A GE or second referendum would almost certainly qualify, as too would some minor delay to sort out a few administrative details.
I don't see them extending so that we can try to renegotiate the WA.
That depends why the renegotiation is happening. They wouldn't extend for Britain to continue muttering vaguely about technology but if there's a meaningful change to one of TMay's red lines that makes something that was previously impossible possible then they might.
Their was an Irish woman on the radio this morning and in keeping with their tradition of great writers poets and thinkers described Brexit as "The Big Stupid".
It's almost a perfect description.
The kind of staggering patronising metropolitan elitist comment that makes the Leave vote harden their resolve.
I don't know whether it's the Irish lady or me that you think made the patronising comment but you'd be wrong. It was neither of us. It's a very clever and intuitive line. Perhaps it doesn't work for you but lots of slogans start off by being invible to most people. 'Shit Happens' 'Just do it' 'I'm lovin' it' 'Finger lickin' good' 'We Try Harder' 'Snap Crackle Pop' 'Every little helps' 'The Best a Man Can Get' 'Beanz Meanz Heinz'' 'You've been Tango'd. All classics with instant recognition and all very hard to come by.
He cannot have said that in all honesty. If he has he owes 17.5 million an apology
Why? It looks like a sober statement judging by the clowns who at every stage have pushed for Brexit without a clue what they want or how to achieve it.
It's just a massive own goal for the EU and judging by the reaction by social media it hasn't gone down too well. I suspect the People's vote campaign secretly wish idiots like Tusk would keep their mouths shut or strike a more cordial tone. This is just more fuel for those wanting to leave.
She doesn't even need to do a deal; she just needs to make an offer that enough Labour MPs can accept.
In fact, I think she'd have to adopt that approach because I doubt that Corbyn would ever do a deal with Tories.
If I had to guess, I'd say the most likely outcome at present is that the WA passes with additional workers and environmental rights, and a permanent customs union for goods, with the backstop only applying to NI wrt. single market rules for goods and agriculture. Maybe the UK could get some extra wording in the political declaration that it'd be consulted on any future trade deals the EU made that involved its customs territory too.
I'd expect about 90 Tory MPs to still vote against this, but perhaps 50 Labour MPs to come on board.
That'd get her up to about 275 votes. She'd either need a lot of abstentions on both sides, or Corbyn to whip the WA for it to pass as otherwise she'd still have 355 votes or so against it.
Far more than 90 Tory MPs will baulk at a permanent CU for goods. They might not all vote against, but many will abstain.
A CU and no SM is an absurdist compromise that is the worst of all worlds.
It directly contravenes what May promised during her Lancaster House speech It directly contradicts the Tory manifesto It directly contradicts her instructions from Parliament It is diametrically opposed to what most Tory leavers want It doesn't obviate the need for a backstop It doesn't meet Labour's six tests.
To whom, exactly, is such a ridiculous "compromise" meant to appeal?
He cannot have said that in all honesty. If he has he owes 17.5 million an apology
Why? It looks like a sober statement judging by the clowns who at every stage have pushed for Brexit without a clue what they want or how to achieve it.
It's just a massive own goal for the EU and judging by the reaction by social media it hasn't gone down too well. I suspect the People's vote campaign secretly wish idiots like Tusk would keep their mouths shut or strike a more cordial tone. This is just more fuel for those wanting to leave.
In what way is it an own goal? It's a statement of opinion, one with abundant supporting evidence.
Obviously the death cult will disagree. But the general view of the cultists is that a bit of economic chaos and a few deaths will be cleansing.
He cannot have said that in all honesty. If he has he owes 17.5 million an apology
Why? It looks like a sober statement judging by the clowns who at every stage have pushed for Brexit without a clue what they want or how to achieve it.
Surprised you're not out and about, reaching out to leavers.
With your revenge cudgel.
There was something very Liam Neeson about some of your posts yesterday.
He cannot have said that in all honesty. If he has he owes 17.5 million an apology
Why? It looks like a sober statement judging by the clowns who at every stage have pushed for Brexit without a clue what they want or how to achieve it.
It's just a massive own goal for the EU and judging by the reaction by social media it hasn't gone down too well. I suspect the People's vote campaign secretly wish idiots like Tusk would keep their mouths shut or strike a more cordial tone. This is just more fuel for those wanting to leave.
In what way is it an own goal? It's a statement of opinion, one with abundant supporting evidence.
Obviously the death cult will disagree. But the general view of the cultists is that a bit of economic chaos and a few deaths will be cleansing.
Alastair it is exactly the sort of hyperbole you would quite rightly condemn from the DUP or ERG
He cannot have said that in all honesty. If he has he owes 17.5 million an apology
Why? It looks like a sober statement judging by the clowns who at every stage have pushed for Brexit without a clue what they want or how to achieve it.
It's just a massive own goal for the EU and judging by the reaction by social media it hasn't gone down too well. I suspect the People's vote campaign secretly wish idiots like Tusk would keep their mouths shut or strike a more cordial tone. This is just more fuel for those wanting to leave.
In what way is it an own goal? It's a statement of opinion, one with abundant supporting evidence.
Obviously the death cult will disagree. But the general view of the cultists is that a bit of economic chaos and a few deaths will be cleansing.
With all due respect your views are slightly cultish on Brexit and not representative of the majority. I think beyond the arch remainers and hard brexiters these comments won't play out well and are a big lapse of judgement from someone who is supposedly a big part of the negotiation process.
He is clearly having a go that those that led the leave campaign, however it isn't really helpful. a) it can easily be misquoted, b) think how Obama's back of the queue stuff went down.
In his position, I would stick to talking about what can be done to try and move forge a way forward.
He cannot have said that in all honesty. If he has he owes 17.5 million an apology
Why? It looks like a sober statement judging by the clowns who at every stage have pushed for Brexit without a clue what they want or how to achieve it.
Surprised you're not out and about, reaching out to leavers.
With your revenge cudgel.
There was something very Liam Neeson about some of your posts yesterday.
Oh I just have no time for people who mewl and puke about how unfair it is that the limited resources should be spent on the bits of the country that actually make money, while voting to reduce those limited resources because foreigners.
The indications are that they would extend for a good reason. A GE or second referendum would almost certainly qualify, as too would some minor delay to sort out a few administrative details.
I don't see them extending so that we can try to renegotiate the WA.
That depends why the renegotiation is happening. They wouldn't extend for Britain to continue muttering vaguely about technology but if there's a meaningful change to one of TMay's red lines that makes something that was previously impossible possible then they might.
Sure, but if there's movement in any of her red lines, she's in trouble this end.
She's stuck where she has always been, between a rock and a hard place.
Btw, I thought Tusk's remark was absolutely spot on. Judging from some of the reaction, the truth seems to be hurting.
He cannot have said that in all honesty. If he has he owes 17.5 million an apology
Why? It looks like a sober statement judging by the clowns who at every stage have pushed for Brexit without a clue what they want or how to achieve it.
It's just a massive own goal for the EU and judging by the reaction by social media it hasn't gone down too well. I suspect the People's vote campaign secretly wish idiots like Tusk would keep their mouths shut or strike a more cordial tone. This is just more fuel for those wanting to leave.
Not an own goal at all - lighten up why don't you?
He cannot have said that in all honesty. If he has he owes 17.5 million an apology
Why? It looks like a sober statement judging by the clowns who at every stage have pushed for Brexit without a clue what they want or how to achieve it.
It's just a massive own goal for the EU and judging by the reaction by social media it hasn't gone down too well. I suspect the People's vote campaign secretly wish idiots like Tusk would keep their mouths shut or strike a more cordial tone. This is just more fuel for those wanting to leave.
In what way is it an own goal? It's a statement of opinion, one with abundant supporting evidence.
Obviously the death cult will disagree. But the general view of the cultists is that a bit of economic chaos and a few deaths will be cleansing.
Alastair it is exactly the sort of hyperbole you would quite rightly condemn from the DUP or ERG
Talk me through "the sketch of a plan to carry it out safely".
He is clearly having a go that those that led the leave campaign, however it isn't really helpful. a) it can easily be misquoted, b) think how Obama's back of the queue stuff went down.
He is clearly having a go that those that led the leave campaign, however it isn't really helpful. a) it can easily be misquoted, b) think how Obama's back of the queue stuff went down.
Speaking the truth is helpful.
It may be unpopular.
Well Obama's speaking the truth wasn't helpful for the Remain campaign.
I've been wondering what that special place in Hell looks like, for those EU negotiators who implemented their strategy, without even a sketch plan of how to stop the UK leaving with No Deal - thereby plunging economies across the EU into recession.
He cannot have said that in all honesty. If he has he owes 17.5 million an apology
Why? It looks like a sober statement judging by the clowns who at every stage have pushed for Brexit without a clue what they want or how to achieve it.
It's just a massive own goal for the EU and judging by the reaction by social media it hasn't gone down too well. I suspect the People's vote campaign secretly wish idiots like Tusk would keep their mouths shut or strike a more cordial tone. This is just more fuel for those wanting to leave.
In what way is it an own goal? It's a statement of opinion, one with abundant supporting evidence.
Obviously the death cult will disagree. But the general view of the cultists is that a bit of economic chaos and a few deaths will be cleansing.
Alastair it is exactly the sort of hyperbole you would quite rightly condemn from the DUP or ERG
Talk me through "the sketch of a plan to carry it out safely".
You're missing the point.
Does the comment: (a) take us towards a No Deal outcome; or (b) help us avoid one.
That's the only question we need to ask at this point.
You have to remember that Labour has many different types of supporters. Are the WWC in the North of England ( traditional labour, who voted overwhelmingly to leave) going to ditch their MPS for giving them their wishes. Not every Labour supporter is a member of the chattering class in Islington.
NickP is probably more aware than most of the different types of Labour supporter.
Such polling I have seen suggests that Labour Leave voters don't generally feel as strongly about Brexit as their Tory counterparts, but I'm not a member and haven't spent most of my life working for them, so I'd defer on this matter to anyone who has.
Labour voters even in pro-Leave constituencies mostly voted remain, and I believe Labour members overwhelmingly so.More important, perhaps, "not assisting the evil Tories to stay in power" is a higher priority than "achieving some sort of Brexit" for all but a tiny minority of Labour members.
She needs 20 or 30 Labour votes, that's enough to require an actual understanding, not less. Whether it's a "deal" I guess depends whether you think only Corbyn can make a deal.
Any Labour MP who aids and abets the delivery of a hard Tory Brexit will not only be ending their career, but will be ensuring their names get written in blood in the annals of the very worst traitors to the movement. And the judgment of the movement on those quisling fucks will be as nothing compared to the monstering that Labour voters will deliver unto them.
It's not a thing any sane Labour MP with serious hopes of remaining such after the next election will seriously contemplate.
You put these things rather more strongly than I do, but essentially I think you're correct. It takes hard work to alienate the entire centrist wing and the entire Corbynite wing at one fell swoop, but voting for a hard Tory Brexit would pull it off.
But if the alternative is voting for the hardest of all hard Brexits, i.e. No Deal, in cahoots with Jacob Rees-Mogg and Nadine Dorries, that's cool with the Corbynistas and centrists?
I've been wondering what that special place in Hell looks like, for those EU negotiators who implemented their strategy, without even a sketch plan of how to stop the UK leaving with No Deal - thereby plunging economies across the EU into recession.
The EU are in recession even before we leave. Although growth has been so anemic across Europe since 2008 that I do wonder if it's ever really left...
He cannot have said that in all honesty. If he has he owes 17.5 million an apology
Why? He's having a go at the leaders of the vote leave campaign, who had no idea how to implement any of this. Not having a go at the voters.
It of course wasn't the job of the vote leave campaign to implement this - they didn't become the government on 24 June 2016. An inevitable flaw of a referendum in which the then PM and government wasn't supportive of the change option.
More generally it just illustrates the mindset - that they cannot conceive that anyone might not want to be an EU member and might if they are already members leave. Yet oddly over 170 nations aren't in the EU and most seem to cope just fine!
It's a bizarre thought that everyone who was scared to the point of incontinence in World War II was interned. But then Marina Hyde was born nearly 30 years after the war.
He cannot have said that in all honesty. If he has he owes 17.5 million an apology
Why? He's having a go at the leaders of the vote leave campaign, who had no idea how to implement any of this. Not having a go at the voters.
I'm still waiting for the 300 million a week for the NHS that was promised.....
Erhh,
Spending increases announced for NHS England’s budget mean that £20.5 billion more will be spent on it in 2023/24 than in 2018/19. That’s £394 million more a week by 2023/24. This money doesn’t cover all health spending.
One of the oddest features of Brexit is that as the negotiations have got more and more shambolic and further and further away from the promised Shangri La, Leavers have got steadily more and more extreme in their hatred of the EU and more and more certain that Brexit is the true path.
Going to be fun when Corbyn breaks cover and says that "Due to the impossible, intransigent position adopted by the EU, particularly over the backstop, I have informed the Prime Minister that my MPs will be whipped to support a No Deal Brexit...."
He cannot have said that in all honesty. If he has he owes 17.5 million an apology
Why? He's having a go at the leaders of the vote leave campaign, who had no idea how to implement any of this. Not having a go at the voters.
I'm still waiting for the 300 million a week for the NHS that was promised.....
Erhh,
Spending increases announced for NHS England’s budget mean that £20.5 billion more will be spent on it in 2023/24 than in 2018/19. That’s £394 million more a week by 2023/24. This money doesn’t cover all health spending.
Well Obama's speaking the truth wasn't helpful for the Remain campaign.
It didn't help them overcome the bullshit in the campaign, but will be very helpful in the truth and reconciliation trials to come when the revolution eats itself
He cannot have said that in all honesty. If he has he owes 17.5 million an apology
Why? He's having a go at the leaders of the vote leave campaign, who had no idea how to implement any of this. Not having a go at the voters.
It of course wasn't the job of the vote leave campaign to implement this - they didn't become the government on 24 June 2016. An inevitable flaw of a referendum in which the then PM and government wasn't supportive of the change option.
More generally it just illustrates the mindset - that they cannot conceive that anyone might not want to be an EU member and might if they are already members leave. Yet oddly over 170 nations aren't in the EU and most seem to cope just fine!
I think it's more that he can't conceive anyone being as clueless as to get themselves into the mess we've got ourselves into.
He cannot have said that in all honesty. If he has he owes 17.5 million an apology
Why? He's having a go at the leaders of the vote leave campaign, who had no idea how to implement any of this. Not having a go at the voters.
I'm still waiting for the 300 million a week for the NHS that was promised.....
Erhh,
Spending increases announced for NHS England’s budget mean that £20.5 billion more will be spent on it in 2023/24 than in 2018/19. That’s £394 million more a week by 2023/24. This money doesn’t cover all health spending.
Yes, but that could have been done anyway. We have not saved a Brexit penny yet.
I know. Just saying, we are getting this money anyway...it is something I don't understand why the Tories didn't just promise in 2017 GE..it seemed like a no-brainer.
He cannot have said that in all honesty. If he has he owes 17.5 million an apology
Why? It looks like a sober statement judging by the clowns who at every stage have pushed for Brexit without a clue what they want or how to achieve it.
It's just a massive own goal for the EU and judging by the reaction by social media it hasn't gone down too well. I suspect the People's vote campaign secretly wish idiots like Tusk would keep their mouths shut or strike a more cordial tone. This is just more fuel for those wanting to leave.
In what way is it an own goal? It's a statement of opinion, one with abundant supporting evidence.
Obviously the death cult will disagree. But the general view of the cultists is that a bit of economic chaos and a few deaths will be cleansing.
Alastair it is exactly the sort of hyperbole you would quite rightly condemn from the DUP or ERG
Talk me through "the sketch of a plan to carry it out safely".
You're missing the point.
Does the comment: (a) take us towards a No Deal outcome; or (b) help us avoid one.
That's the only question we need to ask at this point.
I don't think it does either. Assuming that the decision-makers, all politicians of some experience, act responsibly, it shouldn't affect the outcome either way.
Going to be fun when Corbyn breaks cover and says that "Due to the impossible, intransigent position adopted by the EU, particularly over the backstop, I have informed the Prime Minister that my MPs will be whipped to support a No Deal Brexit...."
Well Obama's speaking the truth wasn't helpful for the Remain campaign.
It didn't help them overcome the bullshit in the campaign, but will be very helpful in the truth and reconciliation trials to come when the revolution eats itself
Hilarious piece of stand up Scott P. I await the revolution comrade!
He cannot have said that in all honesty. If he has he owes 17.5 million an apology
Why? He's having a go at the leaders of the vote leave campaign, who had no idea how to implement any of this. Not having a go at the voters.
I'm still waiting for the 300 million a week for the NHS that was promised.....
Erhh,
Spending increases announced for NHS England’s budget mean that £20.5 billion more will be spent on it in 2023/24 than in 2018/19. That’s £394 million more a week by 2023/24. This money doesn’t cover all health spending.
Only 5 years to go....That sounds like another one of the claims that the trade deal with the EU could be done in "an afternoon".......one of the numerous unicorns that floated around as part of the masterplan that patently is boxxox
I've been wondering what that special place in Hell looks like, for those EU negotiators who implemented their strategy, without even a sketch plan of how to stop the UK leaving with No Deal - thereby plunging economies across the EU into recession.
The EU are in recession even before we leave. Although growth has been so anemic across Europe since 2008 that I do wonder if it's ever really left...
One of the oddest features of Brexit is that as the negotiations have got more and more shambolic and further and further away from the promised Shangri La, Leavers have got steadily more and more extreme in their hatred of the EU and more and more certain that Brexit is the true path.
Wait until they get to Michael Gove's reported position.
That sustained No Deal means we rejoin within a decade.
He cannot have said that in all honesty. If he has he owes 17.5 million an apology
Why? It looks like a sober statement judging by the clowns who at every stage have pushed for Brexit without a clue what they want or how to achieve it.
Surprised you're not out and about, reaching out to leavers.
With your revenge cudgel.
There was something very Liam Neeson about some of your posts yesterday.
Oh I just have no time for people who mewl and puke about how unfair it is that the limited resources should be spent on the bits of the country that actually make money, while voting to reduce those limited resources because foreigners.
The dynamo part of the country - London, specifically, the City of London - is also the part of the country which damn nearly broke the economy in 2007-2008, which has cost the country a huge amount, is still costing it - RBS will never repay the money put into it - and which has disgusted many with the criminality and bad behaviour which has been exposed (and there is far more which has gone on than has ever been made public).
It is also arguable how much money the City actually makes for itself without the effective guarantee provided by the government for its operations. It is that guarantee for the retail side which enabled much of the casino banking to go on. I know that there have been changes since then to try and separate the two but I am not at all sure how effective they will be in practice should something like the 2008 financial crash happen again.
Frankly, a period of humility on its part is needed not lectures about how social cohesion requires other parts of the country to do what it wants and listen to lectures about how people outside London are losers.
He cannot have said that in all honesty. If he has he owes 17.5 million an apology
Why? He's having a go at the leaders of the vote leave campaign, who had no idea how to implement any of this. Not having a go at the voters.
It of course wasn't the job of the vote leave campaign to implement this - they didn't become the government on 24 June 2016. An inevitable flaw of a referendum in which the then PM and government wasn't supportive of the change option.
More generally it just illustrates the mindset - that they cannot conceive that anyone might not want to be an EU member and might if they are already members leave. Yet oddly over 170 nations aren't in the EU and most seem to cope just fine!
I think it's more that he can't conceive anyone being as clueless as to get themselves into the mess we've got ourselves into.
Perhaps he should be concerned about what is going on in his native Poland. 'Poland says no sick cows slaughtered; EU begins inspection'.
Maybe he has been consuming too much prime Polish beef recently?
Comments
She's figured out how to straddle those two stools successfully when so many in the PLP have failed.
This kind of thing, however, suggests she's decided to collapse the wavefunction and she needs to make sure she's inoculated against the worst excesses of Corbyn.
Will his name get written in blood in the annals of the 'very worst traitors of the Labour movement' and will he be regarded as a 'qusiling 'f**k'.
Mrs May's deal is of course pretty much compatible with the Labour 2017 manifesto - surely its more traitorous to betray your voters by reneging on the promises you made. Particularly if you represent a leave voting seat and promised you would respect your constituent's views. Islington North of course is not one of those type of seats!
This is like something from a Free Presbyterian tract
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-47134033
We will scrap the Conservatives’ Brexit White Paper and replace it with fresh negotiating priorities that have a strong emphasis on retaining the benefits of the Single Market and the Customs Union – which are essential for maintaining industries, jobs and businesses in Britain. Labour will always put jobs and the economy first.
A Conservative Brexit will weaken workers’ rights, deregulate the economy, slash corporate taxes, sideline Parliament and democratic accountability, and cut Britain off from our closest allies and most important trading partners.
Labour recognises that leaving the EU with ‘no deal’ is the worst possible deal for Britain and that it would do damage to our economy and trade. We will reject ‘no deal’ as a viable option and, if needs be, negotiate transitional arrangements to avoid a ‘cliff-edge’ for the UK economy.
If you think that "sounds like" or is in any way compatible with the Maybot's execration of a Brexit, I strongly suggest that perhaps your comprehension is lacking.
She could soon be caught between No Deal and Revoke. As I said, I can't read her mind but my guess is Revoke would be the lesser of two evils to her. Note that in NI today she said that a Hard Border will not happen. That would imply Revoke rather than No Deal, but I don't know. I don't think you do either.
Maybe she'll call a GE as her 'get out of jail card'. There are innumerable problems with that too but it might get her off the hook to some extent.
Norway+
Instead all we've had is delay, dither, displace, delude.
I don't see them extending so that we can try to renegotiate the WA.
It's one thing for a delay while the paperwork is sorted out, it's another thing entirely to have a delay while the UK continues to decide what it wants to do...
Even without any EU matters at all on the agenda, May would be a terrible PM.
She's managed, somehow, to be both too stubborn and too vacillating.
Having said all that, I disagree that Revoke is an option. I don't think that she could do it politically and it's questionable as to whether she could do it legally without new legislation.
He’s having a go at those who said Brexit would be easy/risk free, that we held all the aces and there would be sunlit uplands.
Special.
Obviously the death cult will disagree. But the general view of the cultists is that a bit of economic chaos and a few deaths will be cleansing.
With your revenge cudgel.
There was something very Liam Neeson about some of your posts yesterday.
In his position, I would stick to talking about what can be done to try and move forge a way forward.
She's stuck where she has always been, between a rock and a hard place.
Btw, I thought Tusk's remark was absolutely spot on. Judging from some of the reaction, the truth seems to be hurting.
Are you saying that it's all going swimmingly?
https://twitter.com/KateEMcCann/status/1093114893711093760
It may be unpopular.
Lots of WWC leave voters like it because it's just the right blend of nihilism and nationalism that gives them a throbbing purple glans.
ERG nutters like it because they're nutters.
Labour like it because it'll be a shit show at the fuck factory for which they get to blame the tories.
Remainers like it because it's the quickest possible route to rejoin.
May and her dickriders like it because it's better than a bad deal. Unless she's a fucking liar.
Does the comment:
(a) take us towards a No Deal outcome; or
(b) help us avoid one.
That's the only question we need to ask at this point.
More generally it just illustrates the mindset - that they cannot conceive that anyone might not want to be an EU member and might if they are already members leave. Yet oddly over 170 nations aren't in the EU and most seem to cope just fine!
If he doesn't want to speak diplomatically, then at least insert the words 'in the UK political class' into the sentence after the word 'those'.
Spending increases announced for NHS England’s budget mean that £20.5 billion more will be spent on it in 2023/24 than in 2018/19. That’s £394 million more a week by 2023/24. This money doesn’t cover all health spending.
https://fullfact.org/health/nhs-england-394-million-more/
David Lidington would make an excellent successor to Theresa May.
That sustained No Deal means we rejoin within a decade.
That'll be a glorious realisation.
It is also arguable how much money the City actually makes for itself without the effective guarantee provided by the government for its operations. It is that guarantee for the retail side which enabled much of the casino banking to go on. I know that there have been changes since then to try and separate the two but I am not at all sure how effective they will be in practice should something like the 2008 financial crash happen again.
Frankly, a period of humility on its part is needed not lectures about how social cohesion requires other parts of the country to do what it wants and listen to lectures about how people outside London are losers.
Maybe he has been consuming too much prime Polish beef recently?
https://www.apnews.com/0e659f63ba4749ed8e2b4b5f290d9461