If MPs vote against No Deal, but then don't vote for extending A50? What then?
I would not put that past them.
That's the no deal scenario that remains. But I don't see why MPs wouldn't go for the delay in such circumstances. Everyone knows that we need one, the game is who gets the blame for it.
There's a risk, though, that the EU might not grant it. Not a big risk, but non-zero.
Although that's a rather odd sequence in some ways (what happens if all three fail?), it's probably the best attempt at herding the cats into making some kind of decision that she could have come up with.
She could leave erg dup with no option but to vonc government and force GE with ERG defecting to brexit party
If MPs vote against No Deal, but then don't vote for extending A50? What then?
I would not put that past them.
That's the no deal scenario that remains. But I don't see why MPs wouldn't go for the delay in such circumstances. Everyone knows that we need one, the game is who gets the blame for it.
There's a risk, though, that the EU might not grant it. Not a big risk, but non-zero.
I reckon she has already got their OK in principle.
Although that's a rather odd sequence in some ways (what happens if all three fail?), it's probably the best attempt at herding the cats into making some kind of decision that she could have come up with.
There is no strategy behind it - other than keeping May in No10 for another couple of weeks. I honestly don't think she's capable of formulating long term strategic policy. There's nothing there but a grim determination to survive.
Mann and the rest need to stop peddling nonsense . Even in Leave Labour seats a majority of Labour voters voted to Remain .
So Mann should disregard the rest of his constituents?
Are people who aren't Labour voters unpersons?
No but the myth that a majority of Labour voters voted leave in Leave constituencies isn’t based on reality and Labour support has become more pro Remain .
You can’t sustain a policy that ignores that . I’m a Labour supporter but don’t care about another vote however Labour must honour its conference motion .
Mays deal is more likely to go through now which stops a no deal which is my red line . Labour supporting a second vote helps to avoid a no deal as it will put pressure on the no deal ERG nutjobs .
I am not a Labour supporter, but my guess has always been that the so-called Labour Leave vote has been overstated and that Labour voters care a lot less about Brexit than right wing Tories. It is simply much less an article of faith for them, and is therefore something that the Labour leadership can take a risk on.
Although that's a rather odd sequence in some ways (what happens if all three fail?), it's probably the best attempt at herding the cats into making some kind of decision that she could have come up with.
She could leave erg dup with no option but to vonc government and force GE with ERG defecting to brexit party
The trouble with this is that she appears to have bought off the potential Tory rebels, and we are once again left trusting and waiting for her next move.
It would be better if MPs realised that May is never going to find her way out of this maze and took control before some options start closing themselves off.
If MPs vote against No Deal, but then don't vote for extending A50? What then?
I would not put that past them.
That's the no deal scenario that remains. But I don't see why MPs wouldn't go for the delay in such circumstances. Everyone knows that we need one, the game is who gets the blame for it.
There's a risk, though, that the EU might not grant it. Not a big risk, but non-zero.
I reckon she has already got their OK in principle.
Certainly, and indeed they've pretty much said so in public. Even so, with 27 countries involved (including some fighting their own battles with each other and with the EU), some risk remains. It only takes one to be awkward for some reason...
If MPs vote against No Deal, but then don't vote for extending A50? What then?
I would not put that past them.
That's the no deal scenario that remains. But I don't see why MPs wouldn't go for the delay in such circumstances. Everyone knows that we need one, the game is who gets the blame for it.
There's a risk, though, that the EU might not grant it. Not a big risk, but non-zero.
Surely it depends what we are asking for? If it appears (as it does) that we will be asking for an extension without a purpose after rejecting both May's Deal and No Deal exactly what are we planning to do with the extra time we are asking for?
Did I mishear? I though May said if you vote for a short extension, that will not go past the EU elections, then the bill will be amended to say that there will not be another extension and no-deal will apply at the end of the extension period.
I doubt you did - which means the vote on the 12th is May's Deal 13th is to leave immediately without a deal on March 29th 14th is to leave without a deal on June 29th
All 3 of those votes are going to be lost - which surely leaves revoke as the only way out.
Thinking about it that No Deal on March 29th vote really has to be first...
It would be better if MPs realised that May is never going to find her way out of this maze and took control before some options start closing themselves off.
Those same MPs already have control, by virtue of blocking any deal. Of course the intent is just to remain by any means, but they likely can't force her to revoke, so eventually MPs will have to choose.
If MPs vote against No Deal, but then don't vote for extending A50? What then?
I would not put that past them.
That's the no deal scenario that remains. But I don't see why MPs wouldn't go for the delay in such circumstances. Everyone knows that we need one, the game is who gets the blame for it.
There's a risk, though, that the EU might not grant it. Not a big risk, but non-zero.
I reckon she has already got their OK in principle.
Certainly, and indeed they've pretty much said so in public. Even so, with 27 countries involved (including some fighting their own battles with each other and with the EU), some risk remains. It only takes one to be awkward for some reason...
Did I mishear? I though May said if you vote for a short extension, that will not go past the EU elections, then the bill will be amended to say that there will not be another extension and no-deal will apply at the end of the extension period.
I doubt you did - which means the vote on the 12th is May's Deal 13th is to leave immediately without a deal on March 29th 14th is to leave without a deal on June 29th
All 3 of those votes are going to be lost - which surely leaves revoke as the only way out.
Thinking about it that No Deal on March 29th vote really has to be first...
From the Guardian:
And the House should be clear that a short extension – not beyond the end of June – would almost certainly have to be a one-off. If we had not taken part in the European Parliament elections, it would be extremely difficult to extend again, so it would create a much sharper cliff edge in a few months’ time.
Did I mishear? I though May said if you vote for a short extension, that will not go past the EU elections, then the bill will be amended to say that there will not be another extension and no-deal will apply at the end of the extension period.
I doubt you did - which means the vote on the 12th is May's Deal 13th is to leave immediately without a deal on March 29th 14th is to leave without a deal on June 29th
All 3 of those votes are going to be lost - which surely leaves revoke as the only way out.
Thinking about it that No Deal on March 29th vote really has to be first...
Like her gameplan isn't going to change as we work through that process. The third step is there solely to encourage the first one to go through. Yet another bluff.
"This is the metropolitan Labour Party, it’s got nothing to do with Labour voters in my area.”
We can only talk about mood music in our own bubbles. I'd generally agree with him up here. And here we have a 20,000 plus Labour majority combined with a 58% Leave vote. Interesting times.
Did I mishear? I though May said if you vote for a short extension, that will not go past the EU elections, then the bill will be amended to say that there will not be another extension and no-deal will apply at the end of the extension period.
I doubt you did - which means the vote on the 12th is May's Deal 13th is to leave immediately without a deal on March 29th 14th is to leave without a deal on June 29th
All 3 of those votes are going to be lost - which surely leaves revoke as the only way out.
Thinking about it that No Deal on March 29th vote really has to be first...
From the Guardian:
And the House should be clear that a short extension – not beyond the end of June – would almost certainly have to be a one-off. If we had not taken part in the European Parliament elections, it would be extremely difficult to extend again, so it would create a much sharper cliff edge in a few months’ time.
I'm fully aware that we can't extend beyond July without European Elections I discussed that referendum proxy vote with EdwardfromTokyo yesterday.
Mr Foremain Lab voters would not go Blue in huge numbers but some will. Combined with a depressed turnout and some switching to LDs and TIG Labour, UKIP, Brexit it's clear Labour will go backwards. Scotland is not an option for them. Looking at their 60 odd defences with a 5,000 majority or less I reckon 60-70% are leave seats. John Mann should know in Bassetlaw only a marginal swing turns it blue.
Even if Labour hadn't splintered I could have envisaged a scenario where they won the popular vote but had less seats than the Tories. Gentrification of the major cities has played a huge part in messing up their spread of votes.
That is probably a good analysis, though it also depends on how many Tory votes turn red, and which cancels which. I would not vote Labour with Mr Thicky being in charge, but I might switch to TIG.
Yes, think there will be a lot more Red to Blue movers than the other way. Tories more likely to shed to UKIP or Tig/Libs but that is less of a problem in what are predominantly 2 horse races.
I do believe that - in common with the wider commentariat - you are massively overestimating the extent to which Brexit switches votes - particularly Labour votes. As was the case in 2017 , it would turn out to be a very secondary issue in a General Election campaign.
Aren't free votes meant to be for matters of conscience?
Apparently it is a matter of conscience as to whether to support murderous terrorists, if your conscience is in alignment with Jeremy Corbyn.
Why is Hezbollah being banned now?
Seeing as the salafi terrorist "IS" organisation has more or less been defeated, perhaps less need for backchannel communication with the de facto lebanese sh'ia area army ?
Or they've finally realised that Hezbollah itself made clear some time ago, that they do not consider that they have any wings. To Hezbollah, the political and military parts are all part of the same whole.
As has often been the case, people in the West refuse to listen to what these organisations themselves say about themselves and prefer to believe what they would like to be true.
This.
It's worth pointing out that the EU has not proscribed the political wing yet, and Israel is using the UK's ban to call for them to do so.
I'm unclear where individual European countries stand on this issue - you mentioned earlier that they and the US were ahead of us in this respect, but I can't find a clear answer. Wikipedia suggests that (for example) the French have banned the whole organisation, but I saw an article earlier in which Macron said he wouldn't follow the UK in this.
Suprised he won't be following because France already banned the military wing:
Mann and the rest need to stop peddling nonsense . Even in Leave Labour seats a majority of Labour voters voted to Remain .
So Mann should disregard the rest of his constituents?
Are people who aren't Labour voters unpersons?
No but the myth that a majority of Labour voters voted leave in Leave constituencies isn’t based on reality and Labour support has become more pro Remain .
You can’t sustain a policy that ignores that . I’m a Labour supporter but don’t care about another vote however Labour must honour its conference motion .
Mays deal is more likely to go through now which stops a no deal which is my red line . Labour supporting a second vote helps to avoid a no deal as it will put pressure on the no deal ERG nutjobs .
I am not a Labour supporter, but my guess has always been that the so-called Labour Leave vote has been overstated and that Labour voters care a lot less about Brexit than right wing Tories. It is simply much less an article of faith for them, and is therefore something that the Labour leadership can take a risk on.
I agree with that .
There's some solid polling evidence for that, I believe.
Did I mishear? I though May said if you vote for a short extension, that will not go past the EU elections, then the bill will be amended to say that there will not be another extension and no-deal will apply at the end of the extension period.
I doubt you did - which means the vote on the 12th is May's Deal 13th is to leave immediately without a deal on March 29th 14th is to leave without a deal on June 29th
All 3 of those votes are going to be lost - which surely leaves revoke as the only way out.
Thinking about it that No Deal on March 29th vote really has to be first...
From the Guardian:
And the House should be clear that a short extension – not beyond the end of June – would almost certainly have to be a one-off. If we had not taken part in the European Parliament elections, it would be extremely difficult to extend again, so it would create a much sharper cliff edge in a few months’ time.
Almost certainly is a weasel words phrase. It means nothing concrete.
If MPs vote against No Deal, but then don't vote for extending A50? What then?
I would not put that past them.
That's the no deal scenario that remains. But I don't see why MPs wouldn't go for the delay in such circumstances. Everyone knows that we need one, the game is who gets the blame for it.
There's a risk, though, that the EU might not grant it. Not a big risk, but non-zero.
I reckon she has already got their OK in principle.
Certainly, and indeed they've pretty much said so in public. Even so, with 27 countries involved (including some fighting their own battles with each other and with the EU), some risk remains. It only takes one to be awkward for some reason...
Would Gibraltar be 'some reason'.....?
The Spanish GE campaign officially begins a couple of weeks before 29th March.
Labour are all over the place this morning. Tom Watson trying to deal with it by looks of things. Talking about "sovereignty of the current shadow cabinet."
Who is actually running Labour this morning?
We are back to Labour having no policy on Brexit. (Schrödingers Brexit is not a policy).
What do you mean? Labour has loads of policies on Brexit. Loads. Whatever you want you can find a part of the Labour party backing it. No problem.
Although that's a rather odd sequence in some ways (what happens if all three fail?), it's probably the best attempt at herding the cats into making some kind of decision that she could have come up with.
On the back of that, my predictions are as follows:
1. The ERG (maybe with a few exceptions) vote for the deal (which remains substantially unchanged) in the MV but the DUP and tory remainers vote against in sufficient numbers that the MV fails.
2. MPs reject No Deal overwhelmingly.
3. Either (a) an extension is either rejected by one of the EU27 bringing No Deal back to the table as Parliament can't agree anything, or (b) an extension is granted but nothing further changes and the deadlock remains leading to either a GE, a 2nd vote or No Deal.
Whatever the outcome the chance of May's deal passing has just reduced dramatically. I don't see this as good news in any way.
Looks like a concession on MV and no deal - only go no deal if parliament votes for it, otherwise will offer a delay
Then what happens in when the extension comes to an end? It seems to me she is gambling a hell of a lot on her deal getting through in March.
When the extension comes to an end we are back here. Which is why it is sane to deal with this now.
Latest from the Grauniad. Hilary Benn, the Labour chair of the Brexit committee, asks what May would use the extra time granted by an article 50 extension for.
May sidesteps the question, and says if MPs want to avoid no deal, they must vote for a deal.
Jezza has bought a morning's worth of headlines that will keep Remain Labour members happy.
How long before they see through his utter crap.
Surely this has to be the other way round - ie that he will offer to vote for the deal if May agrees to a confirmatory referendum? Why would anyone want Ref2 if the Deal has already passed?
Mr Foremain Lab voters would not go Blue in huge numbers but some will. Combined with a depressed turnout and some switching to LDs and TIG Labour, UKIP, Brexit it's clear Labour will go backwards. Scotland is not an option for them. Looking at their 60 odd defences with a 5,000 majority or less I reckon 60-70% are leave seats. John Mann should know in Bassetlaw only a marginal swing turns it blue.
Even if Labour hadn't splintered I could have envisaged a scenario where they won the popular vote but had less seats than the Tories. Gentrification of the major cities has played a huge part in messing up their spread of votes.
That is probably a good analysis, though it also depends on how many Tory votes turn red, and which cancels which. I would not vote Labour with Mr Thicky being in charge, but I might switch to TIG.
Yes, think there will be a lot more Red to Blue movers than the other way. Tories more likely to shed to UKIP or Tig/Libs but that is less of a problem in what are predominantly 2 horse races.
I do believe that - in common with the wider commentariat - you are massively overestimating the extent to which Brexit switches votes - particularly Labour votes. As was the case in 2017 , it would turn out to be a very secondary issue in a General Election campaign.
Look at the UKIP vote in Gower or Vale of Clwyd in 2015 and compare with 2017.
The growth of UKIP in these seats caused the seats to go Tory. Its demise returned the seats to Labour.
It is not direct Lab-> Con switchers that Labour have to worry about. It is leakage of the Labour Leaver vote to abstain or to another pro-Brexit party.
And you don't need to leak many votes to change the colour of a marginal.
Mr Foremain Lab voters would not go Blue in huge numbers but some will. Combined with a depressed turnout and some switching to LDs and TIG Labour, UKIP, Brexit it's clear Labour will go backwards. Scotland is not an option for them. Looking at their 60 odd defences with a 5,000 majority or less I reckon 60-70% are leave seats. John Mann should know in Bassetlaw only a marginal swing turns it blue.
Even if Labour hadn't splintered I could have envisaged a scenario where they won the popular vote but had less seats than the Tories. Gentrification of the major cities has played a huge part in messing up their spread of votes.
That is probably a good analysis, though it also depends on how many Tory votes turn red, and which cancels which. I would not vote Labour with Mr Thicky being in charge, but I might switch to TIG.
Yes, think there will be a lot more Red to Blue movers than the other way. Tories more likely to shed to UKIP or Tig/Libs but that is less of a problem in what are predominantly 2 horse races.
I do believe that - in common with the wider commentariat - you are massively overestimating the extent to which Brexit switches votes - particularly Labour votes. As was the case in 2017 , it would turn out to be a very secondary issue in a General Election campaign.
I suppose my hypothetical scenario is a GE before Brexit is concluded in which case there would be quite a lot of movement.
Here's a non-working solicitor who was struck off last November, for badmouthing the SRA, and several offences - drunk driving, drug possession etc. I really can't tell whether for a solicitor's professional position that is more or less serious than offenses of dishonesty on oath.
A solicitor who embarked on a foul-mouthed email tirade against the Solicitors Regulation Authority, former colleagues and third parties has been banned from the legal profession.
Luke Stephen Venton, 39, also ran up three separate convictions from 2014 to 2017 for drink-driving, possession of cannabis and possession of a knife in a public place. He was alleged to have failed to notify the SRA about the first two of these convictions. He has not worked as a solicitor since November 2015.
The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal heard Venton responded to one SRA notification of a fine and rebuke that the regulator could ‘stick your adjudication invoice up you’re [sic] a**e you f*****g w****r’.
Asked to explain his response and language, he emailed the SRA supervisor and stated: ‘Here’s another one for you, you f*****g bent c**t(s). The SRA will never regulate me and that is it.’ Venton then threatened to bin any future adjudication invoice before signing off: ‘F*****g w****r – f**k off! Regards, Luke.’
The SRA opted on this occasion to take no further action, but emails continued with the regulator either the main recipient or copied into correspondence with other solicitors and third parties.
Although that's a rather odd sequence in some ways (what happens if all three fail?), it's probably the best attempt at herding the cats into making some kind of decision that she could have come up with.
There is no strategy behind it - other than keeping May in No10 for another couple of weeks. I honestly don't think she's capable of formulating long term strategic policy. There's nothing there but a grim determination to survive.
She's the opposite of a strategic thinker. She'd be terrible at chess - thinks just the one move ahead.
So far I've not been moved to adjust my all-green cop-out. Has Theresa May's "blinder" changed things?
It feels like the ERG suffered from premature ejection when they tried to oust her last year.
She's safe until the end of the year.
So the ERG only have the option of VONCing the government which would be bold and see them labelled as traitors.
I think the ERG will eventually settle for her deal. I suspect if they and a lot of moderate Tories suspected May was moving towards revoking A50 then there would be a VONC.
As things stand I think a tweaked version of May's deal passing after a 3 month extension is the obvious direction we are heading in. May is probably making all the right moves towards passing her deal (some accidentally) and with a fair amount of help from TIG and Corbyn.
Being a British politician at national level today is less consequential and worse in terms of opportunity cost than at any time in the last 300 years. It’s no surprise that the calibre of MPs and ministers is in decline.
MPs are underpaid and under-resourced.
With a basic salary package some way north of £100k, plus all the extra responsibility, redundancy etc payments and gewgaws, that claim is a bit of a stretch, John.
MPs are far better paid and resourced compared with the 1950s & 1960s.
True, but I did think the erstwhile MP Martin Bell's comments were interesting.
He was much more poorly resourced as an MP for Tatton than he was as a BBC journalist!
I think it's fair to say that BBC correspondents in the 80s were better resourced than now, as well.
Looks like a concession on MV and no deal - only go no deal if parliament votes for it, otherwise will offer a delay
Then what happens in when the extension comes to an end? It seems to me she is gambling a hell of a lot on her deal getting through in March.
When the extension comes to an end we are back here. Which is why it is sane to deal with this now.
Latest from the Grauniad. Hilary Benn, the Labour chair of the Brexit committee, asks what May would use the extra time granted by an article 50 extension for.
May sidesteps the question, and says if MPs want to avoid no deal, they must vote for a deal.
So, yes, she is can-kicking.
MPs need to work hard now to expose this sufficiently to give tomorrow's amendments a chance with Tory rebels
My arse, well resourced and well overpaid, too much cheap food and drink and expenses. It is party time for donkey balloons in Westminster. A days work would kill most of them.
I say, that's a bit strong.
The SNP, of course, and the glorious MSPs are exceptions, no doubt!!
What are you mumping about Bellend, do you ever post on topic
Mr Foremain Lab voters would not go Blue in huge numbers but some will. Combined with a depressed turnout and some switching to LDs and TIG Labour, UKIP, Brexit it's clear Labour will go backwards. Scotland is not an option for them. Looking at their 60 odd defences with a 5,000 majority or less I reckon 60-70% are leave seats. John Mann should know in Bassetlaw only a marginal swing turns it blue.
Even if Labour hadn't splintered I could have envisaged a scenario where they won the popular vote but had less seats than the Tories. Gentrification of the major cities has played a huge part in messing up their spread of votes.
That is probably a good analysis, though it also depends on how many Tory votes turn red, and which cancels which. I would not vote Labour with Mr Thicky being in charge, but I might switch to TIG.
Yes, think there will be a lot more Red to Blue movers than the other way. Tories more likely to shed to UKIP or Tig/Libs but that is less of a problem in what are predominantly 2 horse races.
I do believe that - in common with the wider commentariat - you are massively overestimating the extent to which Brexit switches votes - particularly Labour votes. As was the case in 2017 , it would turn out to be a very secondary issue in a General Election campaign.
Look at the UKIP vote in Gower or Vale of Clwyd in 2015 and compare with 2017.
The growth of UKIP in these seats caused the seats to go Tory. Its demise returned the seats to Labour.
It is not direct Lab-> Con switchers that Labour have to worry about. It is leakage of the Labour Leaver vote to abstain or to another pro-Brexit party.
And you don't need to leak many votes to change the colour of a marginal.
I sort of agree, but there was a Survation "constituency-by-constituency" analysis a few months ago which claimed Brexit support had fallen quite heavily in traditionally Labour seats (while holding up better in traditionally Tory seats).
In any case, I think being opposing a second referendum would've been the optimum position for Labour to win the next general election - but, frankly, that now seems a pipe dream anyway, so if the task is just to keep hold of as much of their 2017 vote as possible, backing a referendum is probably correct.
Although that's a rather odd sequence in some ways (what happens if all three fail?), it's probably the best attempt at herding the cats into making some kind of decision that she could have come up with.
There is no strategy behind it - other than keeping May in No10 for another couple of weeks. I honestly don't think she's capable of formulating long term strategic policy. There's nothing there but a grim determination to survive.
She's the opposite of a strategic thinker. She'd be terrible at chess - thinks just the one move ahead.
Parliament has a king and a bishop on the black squares, so she is moving her king about on the white squares.
So far I've not been moved to adjust my all-green cop-out. Has Theresa May's "blinder" changed things?
It feels like the ERG suffered from premature ejection when they tried to oust her last year.
She's safe until the end of the year.
So the ERG only have the option of VONCing the government which would be bold and see them labelled as traitors.
I think the ERG will eventually settle for her deal. I suspect if they and a lot of moderate Tories suspected May was moving towards revoking A50 then there would be a VONC.
As things stand I think a tweaked version of May's deal passing after a 3 month extension is the obvious direction we are heading in. May is probably making all the right moves towards passing her deal (some accidentally) and with a fair amount of help from TIG and Corbyn.
If the ERG had accepted her deal in January there would have been all sorts of backtracking in the meantime.
The have held her feet to the fire - and possibly wrung out a bit more.
Did I mishear? I though May said if you vote for a short extension, that will not go past the EU elections, then the bill will be amended to say that there will not be another extension and no-deal will apply at the end of the extension period.
I doubt you did - which means the vote on the 12th is May's Deal 13th is to leave immediately without a deal on March 29th 14th is to leave without a deal on June 29th
All 3 of those votes are going to be lost - which surely leaves revoke as the only way out.
Thinking about it that No Deal on March 29th vote really has to be first...
From the Guardian:
And the House should be clear that a short extension – not beyond the end of June – would almost certainly have to be a one-off. If we had not taken part in the European Parliament elections, it would be extremely difficult to extend again, so it would create a much sharper cliff edge in a few months’ time.
I don't see why the rest of the EU would want to agree to timing that seems to be designed to maximize the institutional clusterfuck when she runs the clock down again. I think they tell her to either get her skates on and come back in a month or do a proper long can-kick for a year or three to the point where they won't have to see her for a while and everyone can get some work done. At this point they're dictating the terms and she's not really in a position to refuse.
Mr Foremain Lab voters would not go Blue in huge numbers but some will. Combined with a depressed turnout and some switching to LDs and TIG Labour, UKIP, Brexit it's clear Labour will go backwards. Scotland is not an option for them. Looking at their 60 odd defences with a 5,000 majority or less I reckon 60-70% are leave seats. John Mann should know in Bassetlaw only a marginal swing turns it blue.
Even if Labour hadn't splintered I could have envisaged a scenario where they won the popular vote but had less seats than the Tories. Gentrification of the major cities has played a huge part in messing up their spread of votes.
That is probably a good analysis, though it also depends on how many Tory votes turn red, and which cancels which. I would not vote Labour with Mr Thicky being in charge, but I might switch to TIG.
Yes, think there will be a lot more Red to Blue movers than the other way. Tories more likely to shed to UKIP or Tig/Libs but that is less of a problem in what are predominantly 2 horse races.
I do believe that - in common with the wider commentariat - you are massively overestimating the extent to which Brexit switches votes - particularly Labour votes. As was the case in 2017 , it would turn out to be a very secondary issue in a General Election campaign.
Look at the UKIP vote in Gower or Vale of Clwyd in 2015 and compare with 2017.
The growth of UKIP in these seats caused the seats to go Tory. Its demise returned the seats to Labour.
It is not direct Lab-> Con switchers that Labour have to worry about. It is leakage of the Labour Leaver vote to abstain or to another pro-Brexit party.
And you don't need to leak many votes to change the colour of a marginal.
I sort of agree, but there was a Survation "constituency-by-constituency" analysis a few months ago which claimed Brexit support had fallen quite heavily in traditionally Labour seats (while holding up better in traditionally Tory seats).
In any case, I think being opposing a second referendum would've been the optimum position for Labour to win the next general election - but, frankly, that now seems a pipe dream anyway, so if the task is just to keep hold of as much of their 2017 vote as possible, backing a referendum is probably correct.
So far I've not been moved to adjust my all-green cop-out. Has Theresa May's "blinder" changed things?
It feels like the ERG suffered from premature ejection when they tried to oust her last year.
She's safe until the end of the year.
So the ERG only have the option of VONCing the government which would be bold and see them labelled as traitors.
I think the ERG will eventually settle for her deal. I suspect if they and a lot of moderate Tories suspected May was moving towards revoking A50 then there would be a VONC.
As things stand I think a tweaked version of May's deal passing after a 3 month extension is the obvious direction we are heading in. May is probably making all the right moves towards passing her deal (some accidentally) and with a fair amount of help from TIG and Corbyn.
I've always thought a deal would pass. But I have to admit given how irrationally our MPs are behaving at the moment I'm not sure they will step back from the brink...
Rees-Mogg says Brexiters won't back May's deal just to avoid short extension of article 50 On Sky News Jacob Rees-Mogg, the chair of the European Research Group, which represents Tories pushing for a harder Brexit, says what May is proposing on giving MPs a vote to extend article 50 would not change much. He says she is only proposing a short extension, and there would still be a cliff edge.
He says the threat of MPs voting for a short delay would not be enough to persuade Brexiters like himself to vote for May’s deal.
But if the delay were part of a project to delay Brexit altogether, that would be huge betrayal, he says.
The Survation poll from November 2018, which had estimates for each local council, showed very heavy falls for Brexit in Labour / working-class areas since 2016:
The aforementioned Blaenau Gwent had a projected fall of 13% (the 3rd-biggest of any local council), with a VERY narrow Remain win there now projected. The two biggest falls were in Newham (-14.3%) and Barking & Dagenham (-14.2%).
The only council areas where support for Brexit was estimated to have risen since 2016 was Richmondshire (+0.4%) and, curiously, the City of London (+2.0%).
Seems like May is buying herself another three months with a bigger problem at the end of June than she currently has.
That's what she says she'll go shopping for, but it doesn't mean the EU will sell it to her. If they tell her three-month extensions are out of stock, she'll have to settle for whatever time period they've got on the shelves.
"Even in Leave Labour seats a majority of Labour voters voted to Remain."
2017 General Election: St Helens South
Labour Marie Rimmer Votes 35,879 Conservative Ed McRandal Votes 11,536 Liberal Democrat Brian Spencer Votes 2,101 UKIP Mark Hitchen Votes 1,953 Green Jess Northey Votes 1,417
St Helens North
Labour Conor McGinn Votes 32,012 Conservative Jackson Ng Votes 13,606 UKIP Peter Peers Votes 2,097 Liberal Democrat Tom Morrison Votes 1,287 Green Party Rachel Parkinson Votes 1,220
Referendum result: 58% leave St Helens overall - 58% to leave - Remain 39,322 Leave 54,357
Try as I might, I' can't get this to match even 50% of Labour voters voting Remain. The alternative hypothesis is that perhaps you should stick to generalisations about your own constituency.
Rees-Mogg says Brexiters won't back May's deal just to avoid short extension of article 50 On Sky News Jacob Rees-Mogg, the chair of the European Research Group, which represents Tories pushing for a harder Brexit, says what May is proposing on giving MPs a vote to extend article 50 would not change much. He says she is only proposing a short extension, and there would still be a cliff edge.
He says the threat of MPs voting for a short delay would not be enough to persuade Brexiters like himself to vote for May’s deal.
But if the delay were part of a project to delay Brexit altogether, that would be huge betrayal, he says.
Comments
No real pressure on anyone now... essentially the EU know the UK have folded once now, and will probably fold again close to the new deadline.
I honestly don't think she's capable of formulating long term strategic policy. There's nothing there but a grim determination to survive.
It would be better if MPs realised that May is never going to find her way out of this maze and took control before some options start closing themselves off.
And still clings to the Malthouse thing which is surely dead.
We'll need to have european elections if that's the case.
13th is to leave immediately without a deal on March 29th
14th is to leave without a deal on June 29th
All 3 of those votes are going to be lost - which surely leaves revoke as the only way out.
Thinking about it that No Deal on March 29th vote really has to be first...
And the House should be clear that a short extension – not beyond the end of June – would almost certainly have to be a one-off. If we had not taken part in the European Parliament elections, it would be extremely difficult to extend again, so it would create a much sharper cliff edge in a few months’ time.
Anyway, surely these proposals are amendable?
Jezza has bought a morning's worth of headlines that will keep Remain Labour members happy.
How long before they see through his utter crap.
"This is the metropolitan Labour Party, it’s got nothing to do with Labour voters in my area.”
We can only talk about mood music in our own bubbles. I'd generally agree with him up here. And here we have a 20,000 plus Labour majority combined with a 58% Leave vote. Interesting times.
So far I've not been moved to adjust my all-green cop-out. Has Theresa May's "blinder" changed things?
http://www.kataeb.org/local/2019/02/25/macron-says-france-distinguishes-between-two-realities-of-hezbollah
Difficult to know. I think Germany hasn't banned either, and it seems the EU has only banned the military bit thus far.
She's safe until the end of the year.
So the ERG only have the option of VONCing the government which would be bold and see them labelled as traitors.
1. The ERG (maybe with a few exceptions) vote for the deal (which remains substantially unchanged) in the MV but the DUP and tory remainers vote against in sufficient numbers that the MV fails.
2. MPs reject No Deal overwhelmingly.
3. Either (a) an extension is either rejected by one of the EU27 bringing No Deal back to the table as Parliament can't agree anything, or (b) an extension is granted but nothing further changes and the deadlock remains leading to either a GE, a 2nd vote or No Deal.
Whatever the outcome the chance of May's deal passing has just reduced dramatically. I don't see this as good news in any way.
Hilary Benn, the Labour chair of the Brexit committee, asks what May would use the extra time granted by an article 50 extension for.
May sidesteps the question, and says if MPs want to avoid no deal, they must vote for a deal.
So, yes, she is can-kicking.
The growth of UKIP in these seats caused the seats to go Tory. Its demise returned the seats to Labour.
It is not direct Lab-> Con switchers that Labour have to worry about. It is leakage of the Labour Leaver vote to abstain or to another pro-Brexit party.
And you don't need to leak many votes to change the colour of a marginal.
I bloody well would.
As things stand I think a tweaked version of May's deal passing after a 3 month extension is the obvious direction we are heading in. May is probably making all the right moves towards passing her deal (some accidentally) and with a fair amount of help from TIG and Corbyn.
In any case, I think being opposing a second referendum would've been the optimum position for Labour to win the next general election - but, frankly, that now seems a pipe dream anyway, so if the task is just to keep hold of as much of their 2017 vote as possible, backing a referendum is probably correct.
I don't think he has left the site? At least I hope he hasn't...
The have held her feet to the fire - and possibly wrung out a bit more.
Good night, ladies, good night, sweet ladies, good night, good night.
shitsships.Rees-Mogg says Brexiters won't back May's deal just to avoid short extension of article 50
On Sky News Jacob Rees-Mogg, the chair of the European Research Group, which represents Tories pushing for a harder Brexit, says what May is proposing on giving MPs a vote to extend article 50 would not change much. He says she is only proposing a short extension, and there would still be a cliff edge.
He says the threat of MPs voting for a short delay would not be enough to persuade Brexiters like himself to vote for May’s deal.
But if the delay were part of a project to delay Brexit altogether, that would be huge betrayal, he says.
https://www.survation.com/what-does-the-british-public-now-think-about-brexit/
The aforementioned Blaenau Gwent had a projected fall of 13% (the 3rd-biggest of any local council), with a VERY narrow Remain win there now projected. The two biggest falls were in Newham (-14.3%) and Barking & Dagenham (-14.2%).
The only council areas where support for Brexit was estimated to have risen since 2016 was Richmondshire (+0.4%) and, curiously, the City of London (+2.0%).
This was BJOs last post:
To me that just reads like he isn't going to "engage" with you and JJ anymore.
I don't think he's left the site so I'd keep the champagne on ice if I were you!
"Even in Leave Labour seats a majority of Labour voters voted to Remain."
2017 General Election: St Helens South
Labour Marie Rimmer Votes 35,879
Conservative Ed McRandal Votes 11,536
Liberal Democrat Brian Spencer Votes 2,101
UKIP Mark Hitchen Votes 1,953
Green Jess Northey Votes 1,417
St Helens North
Labour Conor McGinn Votes 32,012
Conservative Jackson Ng Votes 13,606
UKIP Peter Peers Votes 2,097
Liberal Democrat Tom Morrison Votes 1,287
Green Party Rachel Parkinson Votes 1,220
Referendum result: 58% leave
St Helens overall - 58% to leave - Remain 39,322 Leave 54,357
Try as I might, I' can't get this to match even 50% of Labour voters voting Remain. The alternative hypothesis is that perhaps you should stick to generalisations about your own constituency.