I'm not betting on this market but if I were I'd be betting against at current odds. Too many people not noted for their willingness to concede defeat who are not yet looking like conceding defeat would need to concede defeat to make this viable.
BMW is leaving it a bit late to turn up and save Brexit.
What's the latest betting on when they're going to intervene?
When the alternative is No Deal. Which MPs have chosen to remove as an option.
This is how it's going to be isn't it - shoulda woulda coulda from Leavers. If only it had been done properly....
Very similar to socialists, in fact.
Of course, you expect anything else?
The difference is that socialists have implemented socialism and its been a failure, whereas Brexit was implemented by Remainers. Putting Robbins and May in charge of Brexit is like putting Fred Goodwin and Jeffrey Skilling in charge of socialism.
BMW is leaving it a bit late to turn up and save Brexit.
What's the latest betting on when they're going to intervene?
When the alternative is No Deal. Which MPs have chosen to remove as an option.
This is how it's going to be isn't it - shoulda woulda coulda from Leavers. If only it had been done properly....
Very similar to socialists, in fact.
Of course, you expect anything else?
The difference is that socialists have implemented socialism and its been a failure, whereas Brexit was implemented by Remainers. Putting Robbins and May in charge of Brexit is like putting Fred Goodwin and Jeffrey Skilling in charge of socialism.
If only the leaders of the Vote Leave campaign had had the opportunity to take over.
BMW is leaving it a bit late to turn up and save Brexit.
What's the latest betting on when they're going to intervene?
When the alternative is No Deal. Which MPs have chosen to remove as an option.
This is how it's going to be isn't it - shoulda woulda coulda from Leavers. If only it had been done properly....
Very similar to socialists, in fact.
Of course, you expect anything else?
The difference is that socialists have implemented socialism and its been a failure, whereas Brexit was implemented by Remainers. Putting Robbins and May in charge of Brexit is like putting Fred Goodwin and Jeffrey Skilling in charge of socialism.
If only the leaders of the Vote Leave campaign had had the opportunity to take over.
Unfortunately they didn't. Two of the leaders of the Vote Leave campaign stood for the leadership election but the MPs overwhelmingly backed May instead. Look where that's left us.
BMW is leaving it a bit late to turn up and save Brexit.
What's the latest betting on when they're going to intervene?
When the alternative is No Deal. Which MPs have chosen to remove as an option.
This is how it's going to be isn't it - shoulda woulda coulda from Leavers. If only it had been done properly....
Very similar to socialists, in fact.
Of course, you expect anything else?
The difference is that socialists have implemented socialism and its been a failure, whereas Brexit was implemented by Remainers. Putting Robbins and May in charge of Brexit is like putting Fred Goodwin and Jeffrey Skilling in charge of socialism.
If only the leaders of the Vote Leave campaign had had the opportunity to take over.
Unfortunately they didn't. Two of the leaders of the Vote Leave campaign stood for the leadership election but the MPs overwhelmingly backed May instead. Look where that's left us.
The Leave campaign kicked off by proposing a second referendum after a vote to Leave intimidated the EU into offering a new deal. Do you really think they had a better plan?
BMW is leaving it a bit late to turn up and save Brexit.
What's the latest betting on when they're going to intervene?
When the alternative is No Deal. Which MPs have chosen to remove as an option.
This is how it's going to be isn't it - shoulda woulda coulda from Leavers. If only it had been done properly....
Very similar to socialists, in fact.
Of course, you expect anything else?
The difference is that socialists have implemented socialism and its been a failure, whereas Brexit was implemented by Remainers. Putting Robbins and May in charge of Brexit is like putting Fred Goodwin and Jeffrey Skilling in charge of socialism.
If only the leaders of the Vote Leave campaign had had the opportunity to take over.
Or even a subsequent general election in which to vote in MPs to do their bidding...
I'm not betting on this market but if I were I'd be betting against at current odds. Too many people not noted for their willingness to concede defeat who are not yet looking like conceding defeat would need to concede defeat to make this viable.
Too many would rather be defeated, so long as they could say they never compromised their beliefs.
BMW is leaving it a bit late to turn up and save Brexit.
What's the latest betting on when they're going to intervene?
When the alternative is No Deal. Which MPs have chosen to remove as an option.
This is how it's going to be isn't it - shoulda woulda coulda from Leavers. If only it had been done properly....
Very similar to socialists, in fact.
Of course, you expect anything else?
The difference is that socialists have implemented socialism and its been a failure, whereas Brexit was implemented by Remainers. Putting Robbins and May in charge of Brexit is like putting Fred Goodwin and Jeffrey Skilling in charge of socialism.
If only the leaders of the Vote Leave campaign had had the opportunity to take over.
Unfortunately they didn't. Two of the leaders of the Vote Leave campaign stood for the leadership election but the MPs overwhelmingly backed May instead. Look where that's left us.
You mean they cried off. If only another Brextremist had made it into the final two...
BMW is leaving it a bit late to turn up and save Brexit.
What's the latest betting on when they're going to intervene?
When the alternative is No Deal. Which MPs have chosen to remove as an option.
This is how it's going to be isn't it - shoulda woulda coulda from Leavers. If only it had been done properly....
Very similar to socialists, in fact.
Of course, you expect anything else?
The difference is that socialists have implemented socialism and its been a failure, whereas Brexit was implemented by Remainers. Putting Robbins and May in charge of Brexit is like putting Fred Goodwin and Jeffrey Skilling in charge of socialism.
If only the leaders of the Vote Leave campaign had had the opportunity to take over.
Unfortunately they didn't. Two of the leaders of the Vote Leave campaign stood for the leadership election but the MPs overwhelmingly backed May instead. Look where that's left us.
You mean they cried off. If only another Brextremist had made it into the final two...
I'm not betting on this market but if I were I'd be betting against at current odds. Too many people not noted for their willingness to concede defeat who are not yet looking like conceding defeat would need to concede defeat to make this viable.
Team Sky are set to announce a new sponsor - owned by Britain's richest man Sir Jim Ratcliffe.
The broadcaster said in December that it would end its decade-long commitment at the end of 2019, during which time Team Sky have won eight Grand Tours.
The team will be renamed Team Ineos - after the chemicals giant that billionaire Ratcliffe owns.
BMW is leaving it a bit late to turn up and save Brexit.
What's the latest betting on when they're going to intervene?
When the alternative is No Deal. Which MPs have chosen to remove as an option.
This is how it's going to be isn't it - shoulda woulda coulda from Leavers. If only it had been done properly....
Very similar to socialists, in fact.
Of course, you expect anything else?
The difference is that socialists have implemented socialism and its been a failure, whereas Brexit was implemented by Remainers. Putting Robbins and May in charge of Brexit is like putting Fred Goodwin and Jeffrey Skilling in charge of socialism.
If only the leaders of the Vote Leave campaign had had the opportunity to take over.
Unfortunately they didn't. Two of the leaders of the Vote Leave campaign stood for the leadership election but the MPs overwhelmingly backed May instead. Look where that's left us.
If you go back further, Gove was a Remainer and Leadsom was a Remainer. I don't know why you put so much significance in where people stood in the run up to the referendum.
A 32% chance sounds too high to me. She's getting closer, but it's hard to see how she'll get enough votes even with the DUP.
Look at Labour MPs.
There is a real risk for them here. Let's say May buys off the DUP. Let's say the die-hard ERG number 25. Let's say the number of Labour MPs voting against is 250. Who do Leaver Labour voters blame for Brexit not happening - some soft southern Toff Tory who they've never heard of - or their Labour MP they voted for? That Labour MP said they would implement Brexit. Good luck geting ther vote next time. When "next time" could be really very soon.....
I'm not betting on this market but if I were I'd be betting against at current odds. Too many people not noted for their willingness to concede defeat who are not yet looking like conceding defeat would need to concede defeat to make this viable.
BMW is leaving it a bit late to turn up and save Brexit.
What's the latest betting on when they're going to intervene?
When the alternative is No Deal. Which MPs have chosen to remove as an option.
This is how it's going to be isn't it - shoulda woulda coulda from Leavers. If only it had been done properly....
Very similar to socialists, in fact.
Of course, you expect anything else?
The difference is that socialists have implemented socialism and its been a failure, whereas Brexit was implemented by Remainers. Putting Robbins and May in charge of Brexit is like putting Fred Goodwin and Jeffrey Skilling in charge of socialism.
If only the leaders of the Vote Leave campaign had had the opportunity to take over.
Unfortunately they didn't. Two of the leaders of the Vote Leave campaign stood for the leadership election but the MPs overwhelmingly backed May instead. Look where that's left us.
If you go back further, Gove was a Remainer and Leadsom was a Remainer. I don't know why you put so much significance in where people stood in the run up to the referendum.
I'd go further. The artificial division of people into "leavers" and "remainers" is the type of binary, Manichaean, dualistic nonsense that infects so much of our public discourse. I was a bit of a young fogey Eurosceptic, gradually being converted to the benefits of the EU over my professional life after I qualified, but perfectly content to see a properly managed exit process with attainable goals over a realistic period of time. That didn't happen.
The fundamental mistake, triggering Article 50 without a plan, was done as a result of intense pressure from Tory leavers who could wait no longer. May turned on the shot clock (to use a basketball analogy) before she had to, purely as a result of the pressure to leave placed on her. Anyone who wanted to do this sensibly would have waited. May's inability to consult didn't help but that character flaw is not a result of her being a remainer before the referendum
Team Sky are set to announce a new sponsor - owned by Britain's richest man Sir Jim Ratcliffe.
The broadcaster said in December that it would end its decade-long commitment at the end of 2019, during which time Team Sky have won eight Grand Tours.
The team will be renamed Team Ineos - after the chemicals giant that billionaire Ratcliffe owns.
Thought he was now Monaco's richest man , having milked UK of as much as he could get.
BMW is leaving it a bit late to turn up and save Brexit.
What's the latest betting on when they're going to intervene?
When the alternative is No Deal. Which MPs have chosen to remove as an option.
This is how it's going to be isn't it - shoulda woulda coulda from Leavers. If only it had been done properly....
Very similar to socialists, in fact.
Of course, you expect anything else?
The difference is that socialists have implemented socialism and its been a failure, whereas Brexit was implemented by Remainers. Putting Robbins and May in charge of Brexit is like putting Fred Goodwin and Jeffrey Skilling in charge of socialism.
If only the leaders of the Vote Leave campaign had had the opportunity to take over.
Unfortunately they didn't. Two of the leaders of the Vote Leave campaign stood for the leadership election but the MPs overwhelmingly backed May instead. Look where that's left us.
If you go back further, Gove was a Remainer and Leadsom was a Remainer. I don't know why you put so much significance in where people stood in the run up to the referendum.
It's because Leavers always need someone else to blame.
I would hope and assume that the Queen is far better advised than to get anywhere near this. It is a matter of politics and she should stay well away. Again this applies even were she to come down from on high swinging an axe in support of Brexit and smiting Remainers to the right and to the left.
For the sake of the Institution, the constitution and the country she needs to stay out of this argument.
A 32% chance sounds too high to me. She's getting closer, but it's hard to see how she'll get enough votes even with the DUP.
Look at Labour MPs.
There is a real risk for them here. Let's say May buys off the DUP. Let's say the die-hard ERG number 25. Let's say the number of Labour MPs voting against is 250. Who do Leaver Labour voters blame for Brexit not happening - some soft southern Toff Tory who they've never heard of - or their Labour MP they voted for? That Labour MP said they would implement Brexit. Good luck geting ther vote next time. When "next time" could be really very soon.....
No matter how you wrap it , it is the Tories holding the great steaming turd.
BMW is leaving it a bit late to turn up and save Brexit.
What's the latest betting on when they're going to intervene?
When the alternative is No Deal. Which MPs have chosen to remove as an option.
This is how it's going to be isn't it - shoulda woulda coulda from Leavers. If only it had been done properly....
Very similar to socialists, in fact.
Of course, you expect anything else?
The difference is that socialists have implemented socialism and its been a failure, whereas Brexit was implemented by Remainers. Putting Robbins and May in charge of Brexit is like putting Fred Goodwin and Jeffrey Skilling in charge of socialism.
If only the leaders of the Vote Leave campaign had had the opportunity to take over.
Unfortunately they didn't. Two of the leaders of the Vote Leave campaign stood for the leadership election but the MPs overwhelmingly backed May instead. Look where that's left us.
If you go back further, Gove was a Remainer and Leadsom was a Remainer. I don't know why you put so much significance in where people stood in the run up to the referendum.
I'd go further. The artificial division of people into "leavers" and "remainers" is the type of binary, Manichaean, dualistic nonsense that infects so much of our public discourse. I was a bit of a young fogey Eurosceptic, gradually being converted to the benefits of the EU over my professional life after I qualified, but perfectly content to see a properly managed exit process with attainable goals over a realistic period of time. That didn't happen.
The fundamental mistake, triggering Article 50 without a plan, was done as a result of intense pressure from Tory leavers who could wait no longer. May turned on the shot clock (to use a basketball analogy) before she had to, purely as a result of the pressure to leave placed on her. Anyone who wanted to do this sensibly would have waited. May's inability to consult didn't help but that character flaw is not a result of her being a remainer before the referendum
Except that one of the very first voices to demand Article 50 was that well-known Tory leaver Jeremy Corbyn.
A 32% chance sounds too high to me. She's getting closer, but it's hard to see how she'll get enough votes even with the DUP.
Look at Labour MPs.
There is a real risk for them here. Let's say May buys off the DUP. Let's say the die-hard ERG number 25. Let's say the number of Labour MPs voting against is 250. Who do Leaver Labour voters blame for Brexit not happening - some soft southern Toff Tory who they've never heard of - or their Labour MP they voted for? That Labour MP said they would implement Brexit. Good luck geting ther vote next time. When "next time" could be really very soon.....
Yes, some Labour MPs (such as Emma Lewell-Buck) are pretty much saying that. But how many will actually go as far as voting in favour?
I would hope and assume that the Queen is far better advised than to get anywhere near this. It is a matter of politics and she should stay well away. Again this applies even were she to come down from on high swinging an axe in support of Brexit and smiting Remainers to the right and to the left.
For the sake of the Institution, the constitution and the country she needs to stay out of this argument.
I would hope and assume that the Queen is far better advised than to get anywhere near this. It is a matter of politics and she should stay well away. Again this applies even were she to come down from on high swinging an axe in support of Brexit and smiting Remainers to the right and to the left.
For the sake of the Institution, the constitution and the country she needs to stay out of this argument.
Her advice would be given quietly and never leaked from her side, in the way she has to many many prime mininsters over 68 years.
She is hardly going to undo a record of not getting involved in political matters by jumping into the single most polarising issue of her reign.
The dire Theresa May gets more despicable. Actually the deal Olly Robbins put together is a decent one on its own terms, given the poor parameters Robbins had to work with. It doesn't give away too much sovereignty in of itself and presents a plausible impression of seriousness. That it will fall apart in a week, if it ever gets passed, entirely reflects the contradictions behind Brexit. The deal will have served its purpose of getting the UK out of the EU and into the unknown.
The dire Theresa May gets more despicable. Actually the deal Olly Robbins put together is a decent one on its own terms, given the poor parameters Robbins had to work with. It doesn't give away too much sovereignty in of itself and presents a plausible impression of seriousness. That it will fall apart in a week, if it ever gets passed, entirely reflects the contradictions behind Brexit. The deal will have served its purpose of getting the UK out of the EU and into the unknown.
One word: backstop. He should never, ever have accepted the principle.
A 32% chance sounds too high to me. She's getting closer, but it's hard to see how she'll get enough votes even with the DUP.
Look at Labour MPs.
There is a real risk for them here. Let's say May buys off the DUP. Let's say the die-hard ERG number 25. Let's say the number of Labour MPs voting against is 250. Who do Leaver Labour voters blame for Brexit not happening - some soft southern Toff Tory who they've never heard of - or their Labour MP they voted for? That Labour MP said they would implement Brexit. Good luck geting ther vote next time. When "next time" could be really very soon.....
Yes, some Labour MPs (such as Emma Lewell-Buck) are pretty much saying that. But how many will actually go as far as voting in favour?
Give it time. 48 hours to go should be enough......
A 32% chance sounds too high to me. She's getting closer, but it's hard to see how she'll get enough votes even with the DUP.
Look at Labour MPs.
There is a real risk for them here. Let's say May buys off the DUP. Let's say the die-hard ERG number 25. Let's say the number of Labour MPs voting against is 250. Who do Leaver Labour voters blame for Brexit not happening - some soft southern Toff Tory who they've never heard of - or their Labour MP they voted for? That Labour MP said they would implement Brexit. Good luck geting ther vote next time. When "next time" could be really very soon.....
Yes, some Labour MPs (such as Emma Lewell-Buck) are pretty much saying that. But how many will actually go as far as voting in favour?
Give it time. 48 hours to go should be enough......
You haven't got 48 hrs. You've got until close of Parliamentary business today for May to be assured that MV3 is going to pass and for the motion to be tabled.
BMW is leaving it a bit late to turn up and save Brexit.
What's the latest betting on when they're going to intervene?
When the alternative is No Deal. Which MPs have chosen to remove as an option.
This is how it's going to be isn't it - shoulda woulda coulda from Leavers. If only it had been done properly....
Very similar to socialists, in fact.
Of course, you expect anything else?
The difference is that socialists have implemented socialism and its been a failure, whereas Brexit was implemented by Remainers. Putting Robbins and May in charge of Brexit is like putting Fred Goodwin and Jeffrey Skilling in charge of socialism.
If only the leaders of the Vote Leave campaign had had the opportunity to take over.
Unfortunately they didn't. Two of the leaders of the Vote Leave campaign stood for the leadership election but the MPs overwhelmingly backed May instead. Look where that's left us.
If you go back further, Gove was a Remainer and Leadsom was a Remainer. I don't know why you put so much significance in where people stood in the run up to the referendum.
I'd go further. The artificial division of people into "leavers" and "remainers" is the type of binary, Manichaean, dualistic nonsense that infects so much of our public discourse. I was a bit of a young fogey Eurosceptic, gradually being converted to the benefits of the EU over my professional life after I qualified, but perfectly content to see a properly managed exit process with attainable goals over a realistic period of time. That didn't happen.
The fundamental mistake, triggering Article 50 without a plan, was done as a result of intense pressure from Tory leavers who could wait no longer. May turned on the shot clock (to use a basketball analogy) before she had to, purely as a result of the pressure to leave placed on her. Anyone who wanted to do this sensibly would have waited. May's inability to consult didn't help but that character flaw is not a result of her being a remainer before the referendum
Correct and indeed anyone who was awake during the referendum campaign would know May is not a remainer. She was even strongly touted as a possible leader of the Leave campaign before she decided sticking with Cameron was the better option. Those decrying May as a Remainer are invariably no-dealers.
The dire Theresa May gets more despicable. Actually the deal Olly Robbins put together is a decent one on its own terms, given the poor parameters Robbins had to work with. It doesn't give away too much sovereignty in of itself and presents a plausible impression of seriousness. That it will fall apart in a week, if it ever gets passed, entirely reflects the contradictions behind Brexit. The deal will have served its purpose of getting the UK out of the EU and into the unknown.
This is what Remainers like you still don't understand. There are no contradictions behind Brexit.
In fact long before the word backstop entered our discourse even Barnier himself was touting a Canadian-style FTA as honouring all of our red lines.
A 32% chance sounds too high to me. She's getting closer, but it's hard to see how she'll get enough votes even with the DUP.
Look at Labour MPs.
There is a real risk for them here. Let's say May buys off the DUP. Let's say the die-hard ERG number 25. Let's say the number of Labour MPs voting against is 250. Who do Leaver Labour voters blame for Brexit not happening - some soft southern Toff Tory who they've never heard of - or their Labour MP they voted for? That Labour MP said they would implement Brexit. Good luck geting ther vote next time. When "next time" could be really very soon.....
Yes, some Labour MPs (such as Emma Lewell-Buck) are pretty much saying that. But how many will actually go as far as voting in favour?
Give it time. 48 hours to go should be enough......
You haven't got 48 hrs. You've got until close of Parliamentary business today for May to be assured that MV3 is going to pass and for the motion to be tabled.
Close of business tomorrow I think; the vote needs to be Wednesday at the latest.
The dire Theresa May gets more despicable. Actually the deal Olly Robbins put together is a decent one on its own terms, given the poor parameters Robbins had to work with. It doesn't give away too much sovereignty in of itself and presents a plausible impression of seriousness. That it will fall apart in a week, if it ever gets passed, entirely reflects the contradictions behind Brexit. The deal will have served its purpose of getting the UK out of the EU and into the unknown.
One word: backstop. He should never, ever have accepted the principle.
BMW is leaving it a bit late to turn up and save Brexit.
What's the latest betting on when they're going to intervene?
When the alternative is No Deal. Which MPs have chosen to remove as an option.
This is how it's going to be isn't it - shoulda woulda coulda from Leavers. If only it had been done properly....
Very similar to socialists, in fact.
Of course, you expect anything else?
The difference is that socialists have implemented socialism and its been a failure, whereas Brexit was implemented by Remainers. Putting Robbins and May in charge of Brexit is like putting Fred Goodwin and Jeffrey Skilling in charge of socialism.
If only the leaders of the Vote Leave campaign had had the opportunity to take over.
Unfortunately they didn't. Two of the leaders of the Vote Leave campaign stood for the leadership election but the MPs overwhelmingly backed May instead. Look where that's left us.
If you go back further, Gove was a Remainer and Leadsom was a Remainer. I don't know why you put so much significance in where people stood in the run up to the referendum.
I'd go further. The artificial division of people into "leavers" and "remainers" is the type of binary, Manichaean, dualistic nonsense that infects so much of our public discourse. I was a bit of a young fogey Eurosceptic, gradually being converted to the benefits of the EU over my professional life after I qualified, but perfectly content to see a properly managed exit process with attainable goals over a realistic period of time. That didn't happen.
The fundamental mistake, triggering Article 50 without a plan, was done as a result of intense pressure from Tory leavers who could wait no longer. May turned on the shot clock (to use a basketball analogy) before she had to, purely as a result of the pressure to leave placed on her. Anyone who wanted to do this sensibly would have waited. May's inability to consult didn't help but that character flaw is not a result of her being a remainer before the referendum
The issue I have with this interpretation is that Brexit has turned out broadly as I confidently expected it to turn out. Theresa May is incompetent but here's the thing. She hasn't made any real difference. The political crisis would happened under more or less any prime minister.
I should say, for a betting site, that I am not good at predictions in general. The last time I felt so confident about an impending clusterfuck was Iraq. For pretty much the same reasons.
The dire Theresa May gets more despicable. Actually the deal Olly Robbins put together is a decent one on its own terms, given the poor parameters Robbins had to work with. It doesn't give away too much sovereignty in of itself and presents a plausible impression of seriousness. That it will fall apart in a week, if it ever gets passed, entirely reflects the contradictions behind Brexit. The deal will have served its purpose of getting the UK out of the EU and into the unknown.
One word: backstop. He should never, ever have accepted the principle.
He did a particularly good job on the backstop. Getting the EU to trash one of their sacred Four Freedoms and to drive a coach and horses through their red lines on paying for full access to the Single Market was a remarkable achievement.
The dire Theresa May gets more despicable. Actually the deal Olly Robbins put together is a decent one on its own terms, given the poor parameters Robbins had to work with. It doesn't give away too much sovereignty in of itself and presents a plausible impression of seriousness. That it will fall apart in a week, if it ever gets passed, entirely reflects the contradictions behind Brexit. The deal will have served its purpose of getting the UK out of the EU and into the unknown.
One word: backstop. He should never, ever have accepted the principle.
Ireland says to EU: it’s important that we don’t have a hard border between the republic and Northern Ireland. It was a source of discontent and could reignite the ‘troubles’. Uk to EU: it’s important that we don’t have a hard border between the republic and Northern Ireland.
EU says: in the absence of a customs agreement we will need to have a border between the frontier of the Eu customs union and the UK’s own customs arrangements.
Ireland and UK: we won’t build one, so what you going to do about it?
EU: it is essential that in the absence of a failure to reach agreement on our future customs agreement to avoid a hard border that we have a ‘backstop’ arrangement that comes in to play which keeps the UK in the EU customs union.
Team Sky are set to announce a new sponsor - owned by Britain's richest man Sir Jim Ratcliffe.
The broadcaster said in December that it would end its decade-long commitment at the end of 2019, during which time Team Sky have won eight Grand Tours.
The team will be renamed Team Ineos - after the chemicals giant that billionaire Ratcliffe owns.
Thought he was now Monaco's richest man , having milked UK of as much as he could get.
Correct and indeed who was awake during the referendum campaign would know May is not a remainer. She was even strongly touted as a possible leader of the Leave campaign before she decided sticking with Cameron was the better option. Those decrying May as a Remainer are invariably no-dealers.
I think May genuinely did support Remain but had an acute sense of how strongly many in the wider Tory party felt about it which is why she kept her head down and hired people like Stephen Parkinson and Nick Timothy.
There's nothing in her previous record to suggest she was a burning Eurosceptic. Arguably even her well-publicised issues with the ECHR were a deliberate misdirection.
Just what the people of Utrecht want to hear, Katie Hopkins is on her way there!!!
God help the Right using a terrorist event to take advantage of the situation to score political points and settle grievances. The left would never ever do that.
Correct and indeed who was awake during the referendum campaign would know May is not a remainer. She was even strongly touted as a possible leader of the Leave campaign before she decided sticking with Cameron was the better option. Those decrying May as a Remainer are invariably no-dealers.
I think May genuinely did support Remain but had an acute sense of how strongly many in the wider Tory party felt about it which is why she kept her head down and hired people like Stephen Parkinson and Nick Timothy.
There's nothing in her previous record to suggest she was a burning Eurosceptic. Arguably even her well-publicised issues with the ECHR were a deliberate misdirection.
Correct and indeed who was awake during the referendum campaign would know May is not a remainer. She was even strongly touted as a possible leader of the Leave campaign before she decided sticking with Cameron was the better option. Those decrying May as a Remainer are invariably no-dealers.
I think May genuinely did support Remain but had an acute sense of how strongly many in the wider Tory party felt about it which is why she kept her head down and hired people like Stephen Parkinson and Nick Timothy.
There's nothing in her previous record to suggest she was a burning Eurosceptic. Arguably even her well-publicised issues with the ECHR were a deliberate misdirection.
What I heard (from a junior minister who worked with her a lot) was that she was genuinely undecided. She leaned towards coming down on the Leave side, but the clinching argument which finally made her vote Remain was that she could see the importance of EU-wide cooperation in combating terrorism and crime. And to be fair, her big speech before the referendum laying out her views was nuanced and consistent with that.
May repeatedly bringing her deal to Parliament for a vote despite it having been heavily defeated twice, once on the original version and once on the renegotiated one, is democracy in action, despite it looking very much like the EU's hated habit of making people vote again and again until they get the right answer.
The voters being asked their opinion on the proposed WA versus the alternatives is an affront to democracy.
The dire Theresa May gets more despicable. Actually the deal Olly Robbins put together is a decent one on its own terms, given the poor parameters Robbins had to work with. It doesn't give away too much sovereignty in of itself and presents a plausible impression of seriousness. That it will fall apart in a week, if it ever gets passed, entirely reflects the contradictions behind Brexit. The deal will have served its purpose of getting the UK out of the EU and into the unknown.
One word: backstop. He should never, ever have accepted the principle.
Ireland says to EU: it’s important that we don’t have a hard border between the republic and Northern Ireland. It was a source of discontent and could reignite the ‘troubles’. Uk to EU: it’s important that we don’t have a hard border between the republic and Northern Ireland.
EU says: in the absence of a customs agreement we will need to have a border between the frontier of the Eu customs union and the UK’s own customs arrangements.
Ireland and UK: we won’t build one, so what you going to do about it?
EU: it is essential that in the absence of a failure to reach agreement on our future customs agreement to avoid a hard border that we have a ‘backstop’ arrangement that comes in to play which keeps the UK in the EU customs union.
UK: No that's not possible I'm afraid, we're leaving the EU customs union but are happy to co-operate as best as we can.
May repeatedly bringing her deal to Parliament for a vote despite it having been heavily defeated twice, once on the original version and once on the renegotiated one, is democracy in action, despite it looking very much like the EU's hated habit of making people vote again and again until they get the right answer.
The voters being asked their opinion on the proposed WA versus the alternatives is an affront to democracy.
The dire Theresa May gets more despicable. Actually the deal Olly Robbins put together is a decent one on its own terms, given the poor parameters Robbins had to work with. It doesn't give away too much sovereignty in of itself and presents a plausible impression of seriousness. That it will fall apart in a week, if it ever gets passed, entirely reflects the contradictions behind Brexit. The deal will have served its purpose of getting the UK out of the EU and into the unknown.
One word: backstop. He should never, ever have accepted the principle.
He did a particularly good job on the backstop. Getting the EU to trash one of their sacred Four Freedoms and to drive a coach and horses through their red lines on paying for full access to the Single Market was a remarkable achievement.
Well quite. It is extraordinary that Leavers find it so unpalatable – it is by far the best feature of the WA.
A 32% chance sounds too high to me. She's getting closer, but it's hard to see how she'll get enough votes even with the DUP.
Look at Labour MPs.
There is a real risk for them here. Let's say May buys off the DUP. Let's say the die-hard ERG number 25. Let's say the number of Labour MPs voting against is 250. Who do Leaver Labour voters blame for Brexit not happening - some soft southern Toff Tory who they've never heard of - or their Labour MP they voted for? That Labour MP said they would implement Brexit. Good luck geting ther vote next time. When "next time" could be really very soon.....
Labour MPs are first answerable to their CLPs, almost all of which will be jam-packed full of Remainers who will, in most cases, take a very dim view of their MP backing a deal when it could have been defeated. It's also worth remembering that most Labour voters in most Leave seats were likely to be Remain voters or less-bothered Leave voters.
The dire Theresa May gets more despicable. Actually the deal Olly Robbins put together is a decent one on its own terms, given the poor parameters Robbins had to work with. It doesn't give away too much sovereignty in of itself and presents a plausible impression of seriousness. That it will fall apart in a week, if it ever gets passed, entirely reflects the contradictions behind Brexit. The deal will have served its purpose of getting the UK out of the EU and into the unknown.
One word: backstop. He should never, ever have accepted the principle.
He did a particularly good job on the backstop. Getting the EU to trash one of their sacred Four Freedoms and to drive a coach and horses through their red lines on paying for full access to the Single Market was a remarkable achievement.
Well quite. It is extraordinary that Leavers find it so unpalatable – it is by far the best feature of the WA.
A 32% chance sounds too high to me. She's getting closer, but it's hard to see how she'll get enough votes even with the DUP.
Look at Labour MPs.
There is a real risk for them here. Let's say May buys off the DUP. Let's say the die-hard ERG number 25. Let's say the number of Labour MPs voting against is 250. Who do Leaver Labour voters blame for Brexit not happening - some soft southern Toff Tory who they've never heard of - or their Labour MP they voted for? That Labour MP said they would implement Brexit. Good luck geting ther vote next time. When "next time" could be really very soon.....
Labour MPs are first answerable to their CLPs, almost all of which will be jam-packed full of Remainers who will, in most cases, take a very dim view of their MP backing a deal when it could have been defeated. It's also worth remembering that most Labour voters in most Leave seats were likely to be Remain voters or less-bothered Leave voters.
Something incredibly important is what Mike Smithson has mentioned on here before: Labour leavers are far less fixated about Brexit than Conservative ones. Put another way, they're flakey on the topic.
Frankly when the General Election comes I don't think it will make a fig of difference to most Labour voters how their MP voted on Brexit.
question: once article 50 is extended is there any legal way for the government to leave the EU before the end of the extension? or are we then at the behest of the EU
A 32% chance sounds too high to me. She's getting closer, but it's hard to see how she'll get enough votes even with the DUP.
Look at Labour MPs.
There is a real risk for them here. Let's say May buys off the DUP. Let's say the die-hard ERG number 25. Let's say the number of Labour MPs voting against is 250. Who do Leaver Labour voters blame for Brexit not happening - some soft southern Toff Tory who they've never heard of - or their Labour MP they voted for? That Labour MP said they would implement Brexit. Good luck geting ther vote next time. When "next time" could be really very soon.....
Yes, some Labour MPs (such as Emma Lewell-Buck) are pretty much saying that. But how many will actually go as far as voting in favour?
Give it time. 48 hours to go should be enough......
You haven't got 48 hrs. You've got until close of Parliamentary business today for May to be assured that MV3 is going to pass and for the motion to be tabled.
Uh? It can be tabled up until tomorrow evening and voted on Wednesday.
May repeatedly bringing her deal to Parliament for a vote despite it having been heavily defeated twice, once on the original version and once on the renegotiated one, is democracy in action, despite it looking very much like the EU's hated habit of making people vote again and again until they get the right answer.
The voters being asked their opinion on the proposed WA versus the alternatives is an affront to democracy.
Have I got this right?
Yes that’s right.
As in right wing demagoguery of the most venal sort.
question: once article 50 is extended is there any legal way for the government to leave the EU before the end of the extension? or are we then at the behest of the EU
Yes. Ratify a deal. The exit date is not the end of A50 period, it is the date a deal comes into force or end of the period if there is no deal.
We could extend for 2 years this week and still be out before the elections if the deal got ratified.
question: once article 50 is extended is there any legal way for the government to leave the EU before the end of the extension? or are we then at the behest of the EU
The exit date in the withdrawal agreement could be before the end date of the newly extended Article 50 period, but it would be subject to negotiation with the EU.
question: once article 50 is extended is there any legal way for the government to leave the EU before the end of the extension? or are we then at the behest of the EU
Probably in the same way it was at the behest of the EU before. If a treaty is concluded, we’ll leave. That requires both parties to agree.
another question: if TM does apply for a long extension does parliament have to sign it off and if so the ERG and DUP could collude with labour to VONC the government before HOC has chance to sign it off?
A 32% chance sounds too high to me. She's getting closer, but it's hard to see how she'll get enough votes even with the DUP.
Look at Labour MPs.
There is a real risk for them here. Let's say May buys off the DUP. Let's say the die-hard ERG number 25. Let's say the number of Labour MPs voting against is 250. Who do Leaver Labour voters blame for Brexit not happening - some soft southern Toff Tory who they've never heard of - or their Labour MP they voted for? That Labour MP said they would implement Brexit. Good luck geting ther vote next time. When "next time" could be really very soon.....
Labour MPs are first answerable to their CLPs, almost all of which will be jam-packed full of Remainers who will, in most cases, take a very dim view of their MP backing a deal when it could have been defeated. It's also worth remembering that most Labour voters in most Leave seats were likely to be Remain voters or less-bothered Leave voters.
Something incredibly important is what Mike Smithson has mentioned on here before: Labour leavers are far less fixated about Brexit than Conservative ones. Put another way, they're flakey on the topic.
Frankly when the General Election comes I don't think it will make a fig of difference to most Labour voters how their MP voted on Brexit.
That flakiness of course doesn't extend to Kate Hoey who this morning seemed to be bigging up her buddies in the DUP as people who will never give way on the backstop.
question: once article 50 is extended is there any legal way for the government to leave the EU before the end of the extension? or are we then at the behest of the EU
Probably in the same way it was at the behest of the EU before. If a treaty is concluded, we’ll leave. That requires both parties to agree.
if we extend then a new pm decides to go no deal can we unilaterally leave before extension end date?
A 32% chance sounds too high to me. She's getting closer, but it's hard to see how she'll get enough votes even with the DUP.
Look at Labour MPs.
There is a real risk for them here. Let's say May buys off the DUP. Let's say the die-hard ERG number 25. Let's say the number of Labour MPs voting against is 250. Who do Leaver Labour voters blame for Brexit not happening - some soft southern Toff Tory who they've never heard of - or their Labour MP they voted for? That Labour MP said they would implement Brexit. Good luck geting ther vote next time. When "next time" could be really very soon.....
Labour MPs are first answerable to their CLPs, almost all of which will be jam-packed full of Remainers who will, in most cases, take a very dim view of their MP backing a deal when it could have been defeated. It's also worth remembering that most Labour voters in most Leave seats were likely to be Remain voters or less-bothered Leave voters.
Something incredibly important is what Mike Smithson has mentioned on here before: Labour leavers are far less fixated about Brexit than Conservative ones. Put another way, they're flakey on the topic.
Frankly when the General Election comes I don't think it will make a fig of difference to most Labour voters how their MP voted on Brexit.
What's more, c half of Leavers don't want the Deal. They want No Deal. Therefore, those angry at those voting for should approximately equal those angry at voting against.
BMW is leaving it a bit late to turn up and save Brexit.
What's the latest betting on when they're going to intervene?
When the alternative is No Deal. Which MPs have chosen to remove as an option.
This is how it's going to be isn't it - shoulda woulda coulda from Leavers. If only it had been done properly....
Very similar to socialists, in fact.
Of course, you expect anything else?
The difference is that socialists have implemented socialism and its been a failure, whereas Brexit was implemented by Remainers. Putting Robbins and May in charge of Brexit is like putting Fred Goodwin and Jeffrey Skilling in charge of socialism.
If only the leaders of the Vote Leave campaign had had the opportunity to take over.
Unfortunately they didn't. Two of the leaders of the Vote Leave campaign stood for the leadership election but the MPs overwhelmingly backed May instead. Look where that's left us.
If you go back further, Gove was a Remainer and Leadsom was a Remainer. I don't know why you put so much significance in where people stood in the run up to the referendum.
I'd go further. The artificial division of people into "leavers" and "remainers" is the type of binary, Manichaean, dualistic nonsense that infects so much of our public discourse. I was a bit of a young fogey Eurosceptic, gradually being converted to the benefits of the EU over my professional life after I qualified, but perfectly content to see a properly managed exit process with attainable goals over a realistic period of time. That didn't happen.
The fundamental mistake, triggering Article 50 without a plan, was done as a result of intense pressure from Tory leavers who could wait no longer. May turned on the shot clock (to use a basketball analogy) before she had to, purely as a result of the pressure to leave placed on her. Anyone who wanted to do this sensibly would have waited. May's inability to consult didn't help but that character flaw is not a result of her being a remainer before the referendum
I would dispute that it was pressure from the Tory leavers. It was clear at the time that the main pressure was coming from the EU themselves who refused to get involved in any discussions until It was invoked and who were openly complaining about the delays.
question: once article 50 is extended is there any legal way for the government to leave the EU before the end of the extension? or are we then at the behest of the EU
Probably in the same way it was at the behest of the EU before. If a treaty is concluded, we’ll leave. That requires both parties to agree.
if we extend then a new pm decides to go no deal can we unilaterally leave before extension end date?
Not unilaterally. The 'no deal' cliff edge would be fixed at the new A50 date.
On your other question, the date change can be made via a statutory instrument so I don't think there's any way the ERG can veto it.
question: once article 50 is extended is there any legal way for the government to leave the EU before the end of the extension? or are we then at the behest of the EU
Probably in the same way it was at the behest of the EU before. If a treaty is concluded, we’ll leave. That requires both parties to agree.
if we extend then a new pm decides to go no deal can we unilaterally leave before extension end date?
Not unilaterally. The 'no deal' cliff edge would be fixed at the new A50 date.
On your other question, the date change can be made via a statutory instrument so I don't think there's any way the ERG can veto it.
why not unilaterally? we are a sovereign nation aren't we?
A 32% chance sounds too high to me. She's getting closer, but it's hard to see how she'll get enough votes even with the DUP.
Look at Labour MPs.
There is a real risk for them here. Let's say May buys off the DUP. Let's say the die-hard ERG number 25. Let's say the number of Labour MPs voting against is 250. Who do Leaver Labour voters blame for Brexit not happening - some soft southern Toff Tory who they've never heard of - or their Labour MP they voted for? That Labour MP said they would implement Brexit. Good luck geting ther vote next time. When "next time" could be really very soon.....
Labour MPs are first answerable to their CLPs, almost all of which will be jam-packed full of Remainers who will, in most cases, take a very dim view of their MP backing a deal when it could have been defeated. It's also worth remembering that most Labour voters in most Leave seats were likely to be Remain voters or less-bothered Leave voters.
Something incredibly important is what Mike Smithson has mentioned on here before: Labour leavers are far less fixated about Brexit than Conservative ones. Put another way, they're flakey on the topic.
Frankly when the General Election comes I don't think it will make a fig of difference to most Labour voters how their MP voted on Brexit.
That flakiness of course doesn't extend to Kate Hoey who this morning seemed to be bigging up her buddies in the DUP as people who will never give way on the backstop.
question: once article 50 is extended is there any legal way for the government to leave the EU before the end of the extension? or are we then at the behest of the EU
Probably in the same way it was at the behest of the EU before. If a treaty is concluded, we’ll leave. That requires both parties to agree.
if we extend then a new pm decides to go no deal can we unilaterally leave before extension end date?
Not unilaterally. The 'no deal' cliff edge would be fixed at the new A50 date.
On your other question, the date change can be made via a statutory instrument so I don't think there's any way the ERG can veto it.
why not unilaterally? we are a sovereign nation aren't we?
It’s a treaty. Can’t just decide not to follow it.
A 32% chance sounds too high to me. She's getting closer, but it's hard to see how she'll get enough votes even with the DUP.
Look at Labour MPs.
There is a real risk for them here. Let's say May buys off the DUP. Let's say the die-hard ERG number 25. Let's say the number of Labour MPs voting against is 250. Who do Leaver Labour voters blame for Brexit not happening - some soft southern Toff Tory who they've never heard of - or their Labour MP they voted for? That Labour MP said they would implement Brexit. Good luck geting ther vote next time. When "next time" could be really very soon.....
Labour MPs are first answerable to their CLPs, almost all of which will be jam-packed full of Remainers who will, in most cases, take a very dim view of their MP backing a deal when it could have been defeated. It's also worth remembering that most Labour voters in most Leave seats were likely to be Remain voters or less-bothered Leave voters.
Something incredibly important is what Mike Smithson has mentioned on here before: Labour leavers are far less fixated about Brexit than Conservative ones. Put another way, they're flakey on the topic.
Frankly when the General Election comes I don't think it will make a fig of difference to most Labour voters how their MP voted on Brexit.
That flakiness of course doesn't extend to Kate Hoey who this morning seemed to be bigging up her buddies in the DUP as people who will never give way on the backstop.
question: once article 50 is extended is there any legal way for the government to leave the EU before the end of the extension? or are we then at the behest of the EU
Probably in the same way it was at the behest of the EU before. If a treaty is concluded, we’ll leave. That requires both parties to agree.
if we extend then a new pm decides to go no deal can we unilaterally leave before extension end date?
Not unilaterally. The 'no deal' cliff edge would be fixed at the new A50 date.
On your other question, the date change can be made via a statutory instrument so I don't think there's any way the ERG can veto it.
why not unilaterally? we are a sovereign nation aren't we?
Because we will have agreed to the new date. It's like invoking article 50 in the first place - there's a two year period and we can leave with no deal at the end of it, but not before.
A 32% chance sounds too high to me. She's getting closer, but it's hard to see how she'll get enough votes even with the DUP.
Look at Labour MPs.
There is a real risk for them here. Let's say May buys off the DUP. Let's say the die-hard ERG number 25. Let's say the number of Labour MPs voting against is 250. Who do Leaver Labour voters blame for Brexit not happening - some soft southern Toff Tory who they've never heard of - or their Labour MP they voted for? That Labour MP said they would implement Brexit. Good luck geting ther vote next time. When "next time" could be really very soon.....
Labour MPs are first answerable to their CLPs, almost all of which will be jam-packed full of Remainers who will, in most cases, take a very dim view of their MP backing a deal when it could have been defeated. It's also worth remembering that most Labour voters in most Leave seats were likely to be Remain voters or less-bothered Leave voters.
Something incredibly important is what Mike Smithson has mentioned on here before: Labour leavers are far less fixated about Brexit than Conservative ones. Put another way, they're flakey on the topic.
Frankly when the General Election comes I don't think it will make a fig of difference to most Labour voters how their MP voted on Brexit.
That flakiness of course doesn't extend to Kate Hoey who this morning seemed to be bigging up her buddies in the DUP as people who will never give way on the backstop.
question: once article 50 is extended is there any legal way for the government to leave the EU before the end of the extension? or are we then at the behest of the EU
Probably in the same way it was at the behest of the EU before. If a treaty is concluded, we’ll leave. That requires both parties to agree.
if we extend then a new pm decides to go no deal can we unilaterally leave before extension end date?
Not unilaterally. The 'no deal' cliff edge would be fixed at the new A50 date.
On your other question, the date change can be made via a statutory instrument so I don't think there's any way the ERG can veto it.
why not unilaterally? we are a sovereign nation aren't we?
It’s a treaty. Can’t just decide not to follow it.
As far as understood things you can revoke a treaty as a sovereign nation if you believe the other party is not acting in good faith. At the end of the what are they going to do to stop us?
May repeatedly bringing her deal to Parliament for a vote despite it having been heavily defeated twice, once on the original version and once on the renegotiated one, is democracy in action, despite it looking very much like the EU's hated habit of making people vote again and again until they get the right answer.
The voters being asked their opinion on the proposed WA versus the alternatives is an affront to democracy.
Have I got this right?
The people have voted. MPs are not the people.
I see no basis for repeatedly bringing the WA back to Parliament once it has been voted on, absent any change to the WA itself. It's bullying.
And, even more importantly, an agreement which is bludgeoned through in this way has no real consent. It will be undermined by those who don't really want it the moment after it goes through. The EU know this; they can see the sorts of games both Tories and Labour have been playing and they will take this into account during the transition period - when I fully expect them to make strenuous efforts to persuade industries to relocate to the EU in view of the political climate in Britain - and in relation to the FTA negotiations where they will do everything possible to nail down Britain in a way to prevent us competing with the EU, whether this is on the basis of the Tories' Singapore-on-Thames vision or Corbyn's autarkic socialist vision.
Far better either to get people's consent to it or to revoke Article 50 and think hard about what we really want as a country before taking such important decisions.
question: once article 50 is extended is there any legal way for the government to leave the EU before the end of the extension? or are we then at the behest of the EU
Probably in the same way it was at the behest of the EU before. If a treaty is concluded, we’ll leave. That requires both parties to agree.
if we extend then a new pm decides to go no deal can we unilaterally leave before extension end date?
Not unilaterally. The 'no deal' cliff edge would be fixed at the new A50 date.
On your other question, the date change can be made via a statutory instrument so I don't think there's any way the ERG can veto it.
why not unilaterally? we are a sovereign nation aren't we?
It’s a treaty. Can’t just decide not to follow it.
Well you can. Countries have unilaterally denounced treaties in the past. That's usually been in the context of war breaking out though.
However who'd want to make new treaties, including trade deals, with a country that unilaterally breaks other treaties?
question: once article 50 is extended is there any legal way for the government to leave the EU before the end of the extension? or are we then at the behest of the EU
Probably in the same way it was at the behest of the EU before. If a treaty is concluded, we’ll leave. That requires both parties to agree.
if we extend then a new pm decides to go no deal can we unilaterally leave before extension end date?
Not unilaterally. The 'no deal' cliff edge would be fixed at the new A50 date.
On your other question, the date change can be made via a statutory instrument so I don't think there's any way the ERG can veto it.
Pretty sure any SI to change the exit date in the EUWA needs both houses to positively approve it.
question: once article 50 is extended is there any legal way for the government to leave the EU before the end of the extension? or are we then at the behest of the EU
Probably in the same way it was at the behest of the EU before. If a treaty is concluded, we’ll leave. That requires both parties to agree.
if we extend then a new pm decides to go no deal can we unilaterally leave before extension end date?
Not unilaterally. The 'no deal' cliff edge would be fixed at the new A50 date.
On your other question, the date change can be made via a statutory instrument so I don't think there's any way the ERG can veto it.
why not unilaterally? we are a sovereign nation aren't we?
It’s a treaty. Can’t just decide not to follow it.
As far as understood things you can revoke a treaty as a sovereign nation if you believe the other party is not acting in good faith. At the end of the what are they going to do to stop us?
What would it achieve for the government to declare 'no deal' while the UK was still in the EU according to EU and UK law? It would just make them look even less credible.
May repeatedly bringing her deal to Parliament for a vote despite it having been heavily defeated twice, once on the original version and once on the renegotiated one, is democracy in action, despite it looking very much like the EU's hated habit of making people vote again and again until they get the right answer.
The voters being asked their opinion on the proposed WA versus the alternatives is an affront to democracy.
Have I got this right?
The people have voted. MPs are not the people.
But why does the anti-democratic principle that you are not allowed to reconsider your own decision apply to the people, but not to MPs?
question: once article 50 is extended is there any legal way for the government to leave the EU before the end of the extension? or are we then at the behest of the EU
Probably in the same way it was at the behest of the EU before. If a treaty is concluded, we’ll leave. That requires both parties to agree.
if we extend then a new pm decides to go no deal can we unilaterally leave before extension end date?
Not unilaterally. The 'no deal' cliff edge would be fixed at the new A50 date.
On your other question, the date change can be made via a statutory instrument so I don't think there's any way the ERG can veto it.
why not unilaterally? we are a sovereign nation aren't we?
It’s a treaty. Can’t just decide not to follow it.
As far as understood things you can revoke a treaty as a sovereign nation if you believe the other party is not acting in good faith. At the end of the what are they going to do to stop us?
What would it achieve for the government to declare 'no deal' while the UK was still in the EU according to EU and UK law? It would just make them look even less credible.
couldn't we just repeal the 1972 European communities act that took us in , in the first place?
question: once article 50 is extended is there any legal way for the government to leave the EU before the end of the extension? or are we then at the behest of the EU
Probably in the same way it was at the behest of the EU before. If a treaty is concluded, we’ll leave. That requires both parties to agree.
if we extend then a new pm decides to go no deal can we unilaterally leave before extension end date?
Not unilaterally. The 'no deal' cliff edge would be fixed at the new A50 date.
On your other question, the date change can be made via a statutory instrument so I don't think there's any way the ERG can veto it.
why not unilaterally? we are a sovereign nation aren't we?
It’s a treaty. Can’t just decide not to follow it.
As far as understood things you can revoke a treaty as a sovereign nation if you believe the other party is not acting in good faith. At the end of the what are they going to do to stop us?
How would they not be acting in good faith? If the UK wanted to leave with no deal, there is a clear procedure for that.
May repeatedly bringing her deal to Parliament for a vote despite it having been heavily defeated twice, once on the original version and once on the renegotiated one, is democracy in action, despite it looking very much like the EU's hated habit of making people vote again and again until they get the right answer.
The voters being asked their opinion on the proposed WA versus the alternatives is an affront to democracy.
Have I got this right?
That's not unreasonable. Referenda carry a great deal more moral weight than Parliamentary resolutions do.
question: once article 50 is extended is there any legal way for the government to leave the EU before the end of the extension? or are we then at the behest of the EU
Probably in the same way it was at the behest of the EU before. If a treaty is concluded, we’ll leave. That requires both parties to agree.
if we extend then a new pm decides to go no deal can we unilaterally leave before extension end date?
Not unilaterally. The 'no deal' cliff edge would be fixed at the new A50 date.
On your other question, the date change can be made via a statutory instrument so I don't think there's any way the ERG can veto it.
why not unilaterally? we are a sovereign nation aren't we?
It’s a treaty. Can’t just decide not to follow it.
Well you can. Countries have unilaterally denounced treaties in the past. That's usually been in the context of war breaking out though.
However who'd want to make new treaties, including trade deals, with a country that unilaterally breaks other treaties?
Precisely why I said you can’t just decide not to folllow it.
BMW is leaving it a bit late to turn up and save Brexit.
What's the latest betting on when they're going to intervene?
When the alternative is No Deal. Which MPs have chosen to remove as an option.
This is how it's going to be isn't it - shoulda woulda coulda from Leavers. If only it had been done properly....
Very similar to socialists, in fact.
Of course, you expect anything else?
If only the leaders of the Vote Leave campaign had had the opportunity to take over.
Unfortunately they didn't. Two of the leaders of the Vote Leave campaign stood for the leadership election but the MPs overwhelmingly backed May instead. Look where that's left us.
If you go back further, Gove was a Remainer and Leadsom was a Remainer. I don't know why you put so much significance in where people stood in the run up to the referendum.
I'd go further. The artificial division of people into "leavers" and "remainers" is the type of binary, Manichaean, dualistic nonsense that infects so much of our public discourse. I was a bit of a young fogey Eurosceptic, gradually being converted to the benefits of the EU over my professional life after I qualified, but perfectly content to see a properly managed exit process with attainable goals over a realistic period of time. That didn't happen.
The fundamental mistake, triggering Article 50 without a plan, was done as a result of intense pressure from Tory leavers who could wait no longer. May turned on the shot clock (to use a basketball analogy) before she had to, purely as a result of the pressure to leave placed on her. Anyone who wanted to do this sensibly would have waited. May's inability to consult didn't help but that character flaw is not a result of her being a remainer before the referendum
I would dispute that it was pressure from the Tory leavers. It was clear at the time that the main pressure was coming from the EU themselves who refused to get involved in any discussions until It was invoked and who were openly complaining about the delays.
There was pressure from the EU but there was a terrific amount of cheering from the leave side when she did so. The amount of abuse that the Supreme Court got as a result of Gina Miller's application arose as a result of a fear of delay.
" … the EU themselves who refused to get involved in any discussions until It was invoked and who were openly complaining about the delays."
Indeed they did, but many Leavers were in a hurry too because they feared Parliament would try to fart around for as long as possible to delay Brexit. How right they were.
May repeatedly bringing her deal to Parliament for a vote despite it having been heavily defeated twice, once on the original version and once on the renegotiated one, is democracy in action, despite it looking very much like the EU's hated habit of making people vote again and again until they get the right answer.
The voters being asked their opinion on the proposed WA versus the alternatives is an affront to democracy.
Have I got this right?
That's not unreasonable. Referenda carry a great deal more moral weight than Parliamentary resolutions do.
Not in a Parliamentary democracy when one of the arguments made during the referendum was to restore Parliamentary sovereignty.
Comments
The difference is that socialists have implemented socialism and its been a failure, whereas Brexit was implemented by Remainers. Putting Robbins and May in charge of Brexit is like putting Fred Goodwin and Jeffrey Skilling in charge of socialism.
No more cajoling. Take no prisoners.
Vote for my deal on Wednesday or I will take Brexit off for two years.
You mean they cried off.
If only another Brextremist had made it into the final two...
Never, never, never.......
No brainer.
The broadcaster said in December that it would end its decade-long commitment at the end of 2019, during which time Team Sky have won eight Grand Tours.
The team will be renamed Team Ineos - after the chemicals giant that billionaire Ratcliffe owns.
https://twitter.com/nickmacpherson2/status/1107635029285453824
There is a real risk for them here. Let's say May buys off the DUP. Let's say the die-hard ERG number 25. Let's say the number of Labour MPs voting against is 250. Who do Leaver Labour voters blame for Brexit not happening - some soft southern Toff Tory who they've never heard of - or their Labour MP they voted for? That Labour MP said they would implement Brexit. Good luck geting ther vote next time. When "next time" could be really very soon.....
https://twitter.com/tpgcolson/status/1107556893671809026
"The Brits partitioned my country too, you know!"
https://twitter.com/Queen_UK/status/1105932633639473153?s=19
The fundamental mistake, triggering Article 50 without a plan, was done as a result of intense pressure from Tory leavers who could wait no longer. May turned on the shot clock (to use a basketball analogy) before she had to, purely as a result of the pressure to leave placed on her. Anyone who wanted to do this sensibly would have waited. May's inability to consult didn't help but that character flaw is not a result of her being a remainer before the referendum
For the sake of the Institution, the constitution and the country she needs to stay out of this argument.
She is hardly going to undo a record of not getting involved in political matters by jumping into the single most polarising issue of her reign.
The dire Theresa May gets more despicable. Actually the deal Olly Robbins put together is a decent one on its own terms, given the poor parameters Robbins had to work with. It doesn't give away too much sovereignty in of itself and presents a plausible impression of seriousness. That it will fall apart in a week, if it ever gets passed, entirely reflects the contradictions behind Brexit. The deal will have served its purpose of getting the UK out of the EU and into the unknown.
In fact long before the word backstop entered our discourse even Barnier himself was touting a Canadian-style FTA as honouring all of our red lines.
I should say, for a betting site, that I am not good at predictions in general. The last time I felt so confident about an impending clusterfuck was Iraq. For pretty much the same reasons.
Uk to EU: it’s important that we don’t have a hard border between the republic and Northern Ireland.
EU says: in the absence of a customs agreement we will need to have a border between the frontier of the Eu customs union and the UK’s own customs arrangements.
Ireland and UK: we won’t build one, so what you going to do about it?
EU: it is essential that in the absence of a failure to reach agreement on our future customs agreement to avoid a hard border that we have a ‘backstop’ arrangement that comes in to play which keeps the UK in the EU customs union.
There's nothing in her previous record to suggest she was a burning Eurosceptic. Arguably even her well-publicised issues with the ECHR were a deliberate misdirection.
God help the Right using a terrorist event to take advantage of the situation to score political points and settle grievances. The left would never ever do that.
May repeatedly bringing her deal to Parliament for a vote despite it having been heavily defeated twice, once on the original version and once on the renegotiated one, is democracy in action, despite it looking very much like the EU's hated habit of making people vote again and again until they get the right answer.
The voters being asked their opinion on the proposed WA versus the alternatives is an affront to democracy.
Have I got this right?
Conceding the backstop was a grave error.
The Mouse on the Moon?
Frankly when the General Election comes I don't think it will make a fig of difference to most Labour voters how their MP voted on Brexit.
once article 50 is extended is there any legal way for the government to leave the EU before the end of the extension? or are we then at the behest of the EU
As in right wing demagoguery of the most venal sort.
We could extend for 2 years this week and still be out before the elections if the deal got ratified.
Therefore, those angry at those voting for should approximately equal those angry at voting against.
On your other question, the date change can be made via a statutory instrument so I don't think there's any way the ERG can veto it.
"Jeremy Corbyn hints he could back Leave in second Brexit vote"
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/jeremy-corbyn-hints-he-could-back-leave-in-second-brexit-vote-kr7vlzdbp
And, even more importantly, an agreement which is bludgeoned through in this way has no real consent. It will be undermined by those who don't really want it the moment after it goes through. The EU know this; they can see the sorts of games both Tories and Labour have been playing and they will take this into account during the transition period - when I fully expect them to make strenuous efforts to persuade industries to relocate to the EU in view of the political climate in Britain - and in relation to the FTA negotiations where they will do everything possible to nail down Britain in a way to prevent us competing with the EU, whether this is on the basis of the Tories' Singapore-on-Thames vision or Corbyn's autarkic socialist vision.
Far better either to get people's consent to it or to revoke Article 50 and think hard about what we really want as a country before taking such important decisions.
However who'd want to make new treaties, including trade deals, with a country that unilaterally breaks other treaties?
Are they down to single figures?
" … the EU themselves who refused to get involved in any discussions until It was invoked and who were openly complaining about the delays."
Indeed they did, but many Leavers were in a hurry too because they feared Parliament would try to fart around for as long as possible to delay Brexit. How right they were.