It is now time for May to choose. She needs to ditch the ERG and accept Benn's offer to vote for her deal with a referendum. It is the only way she can act in the national interest.
That has gone with yesterdays 12th April deadline. No referendum now possible
Not so (although I agree the support probably isn't there). We have three weeks to come up with a plan, and then ask for the longer - probably nine month - extension that May intended to ask for before she was nobbled. Nine months is long enough for a referendum to feature within that plan, if that is what MPs decide.
Well after May's dismal performance in front of EU leaders, it seems rather than bank everything on her deal they've chucked May under the bus and it looks like we'll head toward the softest possible Brexit now. WA remains, that's the EU's absolute red line but a very soft political declaration. No deal, May's deal, 2nd ref all out.
The can gets another short kick down the road it seems. Both the EU and to an extent Theresa may have looked over the cliff edge and stepped back though not very far. The legalities with which so many here have been exercised apply to the EU when it comes to the electoral process and so 12 April is as far as we can go without a final definitive decision and it's the EU elections and the ramifications thereof which define the end of the road.
To use a well worn phrase, nothing has changed. The options to support the WA, leave without endorsing a WA and revoking are as valid now as they were yesterday. All that has happened is that March 29th has become April 12th.
The only way to remain now however is to revoke. Back the WA and we leave on 22/5. Don't support the WA and we go on 12/4 and that's essentially it. For those opposed to the WA the dynamics of leaving haven't changed - it's a two week delay but that's all.
It does seem enough will be changed to allow the WA one more chance to clear the Commons but MV3 is the last chance - there won't be an MV4.
Where are we politically? May has probably done enough to survive until the WA and is surely hoping worried Council candidates and frightened Mail-clutching constituents will help sway wavering hardliners into line. Maybe but she now has to bring the MV back even if she knows it will fall again and I do think it will be, to coin a baseball parlance, "three strikes and out" for Theresa May. I don't see how she can survive a third rejection of the WA.
I think the EU has reopened avenues other than Deal/NoDeal which appeared to have been closed off yesterday. They are unlikely to be delivered by TMay, but if the HoC was minded to kick her out, I think a delegation proposing X over the next 9 months would get a warm welcome.
Except on the doorstep.
I am never sure that "the doorstep" is a very good indicator. Having done a fair amount of canvassing myself I would say that in many areas the majority don't come to the door for the reason that they don't want to engage. They generally hide if they see anyone with a rosette, unless they are the type that like to engage in politics, or want to have a rant. Therefore those with strong Brexit views will have a disproportionate opinion expressed versus the pragmatic majority, let alone the "don't care" contingent.
The doorstep is the single most accurate way of determing voting intention of an area and the pulse of your supporters.
Yep. In my six elections I knew in five of them after doing the first few streets that we looked good to go, and the other time that things were going to be tough.
It is now time for May to choose. She needs to ditch the ERG and accept Benn's offer to vote for her deal with a referendum. It is the only way she can act in the national interest.
That has gone with yesterdays 12th April deadline. No referendum now possible
Nah, they said they'd consider a longer extension for a "plan B". That includes a referendum
HYUFD goes on about Norway Plus, I hear Common Market 2.0 mentioned but to what extent are any of these options simply obfuscations just like a second vote?
The EU have agreed a WA - that's what is on the table, nothing else. They have now said there will be no further negotiation so all these other ideas, plans and theories have no significance.
If we Revoke A50 and re-commence negotiations say three months down the road we can negotiate a Norway Plus or Common Market 2.0 based on the fact said option would likely command a majority in the Commons but that's not where we are as of now.
In the same way, voting against No Deal doesn't and hasn't prevented it. We leave on April 12th if we haven't agreed the WA and haven't revoked. There won't be another extension from the EU because of the Parliamentary elections so if we have nothing we leave with nothing.
Hope I am not tempting fate but is TM the greatest survivor in politics
Surely if that title were to go to any contemporary politician, it'd be Corbyn?
If one were forced to dig around for compliments for either of them these would be about the only areas of faint praise applicable. They are both equally responsible for the mess we are in. They are childish partisan pigmies, so riddled with prejudiced dislike of anyone in any other party that they are completely unable to do what the country needs so much and work together. They are both a disgrace.
It is now time for May to choose. She needs to ditch the ERG and accept Benn's offer to vote for her deal with a referendum. It is the only way she can act in the national interest.
Problem is we've run out of time for a referendum. Unless we go for a 'long' extention.
Not possible now unless you can explain how the HOC passes enabling legislation for participation in the EU elections in the next three weeks
Gove was co-convener of the Vofe Leave campaign committee. Vote Leave’s campaign literature appeared to rule out a leaving without a deal. Accordingly any advice Gove gave, unless he was not fully behind his own campaign’s view on this, would presumably rule out the hard man no-dealer approach you have been advocating. I fail to see how any path Gove, who pointedly remains in cabinet, would significantly differ from the one taken.
It's ridiculous to say anyone could have done better: Brexit is a mess, and would have been a mess whoever was in charge of negotiations. The sides are too far apart for any meaningful compromise to be easily reached.
Give would have faced just as many problems as May; they might have been different problems, but problems nonetheless.
And the reason the sides are so far apart? The leave campaigns who lied about Brexit, and promised everything to everyone.
It'd be good for leavers to take some responsibility instead of pathetically moaning: "If my person was in charge it would have been different!"
She drew them because she prioritised positive headlines in the right wing press over the national interest.
She drew them because she identified what had motivated LEAVE voters to the horror of their bien pensant betters.
Yes. But this is where she went wrong, with all due respect.
Identifying what motivated most Leave voters does not give any sort of sensible basis to come up with a plan which works for the future for the whole country, which is what was and is needed. It is backward looking. When what a leader needs to do is to work from that, try to address those concerns but develop a plan that works for the future because:-
(a) If it is going to work and last it needs to have consent from as wide a group as possible and needs to meet the challenges of the future; and (b) those voters will - if the plan turns out to be crap - complain just as loudly and forget their own reasons. They won't hold themselves to account. They may change their views or consider other aspects more important over time. So you need to be flexible enough to think ahead.
There were plenty of ways of addressing voters' concerns about immigration without getting into this mess. And look where we are now - with immigration as high as ever and the non-EU immigration over which the country has always had control higher than it has ever been.
Of course, getting to Norway probably leaves the requirement to vote for the MV, which is higly unlikey...so how will it happen?
MV3 gets voted down, MV4 gets effectively amended to WA + softer PD by a Powell/Letwin amendment of sorts and gets passed. The legal effect to the EU of May's original deal remains as was in MV3 but the course is set for a softer brexit after transition.
48% voted for the FOM status quo, while a sizeable minority of Leavers (Tyndallites) also support FOM. So you could infer that the voters “want” FOM.
But, inferring anything other than a vote to Leave is a fool’s errand. There wasn’t absolutely nothing about FOM on the ballot, so Norway+ respects the referendum result and strikes a sensible compromise.
Good luck selling continued FoM as 'leaving the EU'.
We are at the stage where any Brexiter with sense (OK, I know) should take whatever Brexit they can get. They aren't going to have the luxury of picking and choosing for much longer.
Which would be the Deal - the EU Deal. The government has been spectacularly poor at selling stuff. All Corbyn has to do is take "May's Deal" to Brussels, rearrange a few sentences without changing a whit of meaning and bring it back in triumph as "The EU Jobs First Deal" and see its popularity soar.
Because Leavers didn't vote for damage limitation. Holding out is quite rational at that level.
Hope I am not tempting fate but is TM the greatest survivor in politics
Surely if that title were to go to any contemporary politician, it'd be Corbyn?
If one were forced to dig around for compliments for either of them these would be about the only areas of faint praise applicable. They are both equally responsible for the mess we are in. They are childish partisan pigmies, so riddled with prejudiced dislike of anyone in any other party that they are completely unable to do what the country needs so much and work together. They are both a disgrace.
To be fair to May, she was prepared to break cheese and biscuits with Chuka Umunna.....
The can gets another short kick down the road it seems. Both the EU and to an extent Theresa may have looked over the cliff edge and stepped back though not very far. The legalities with which so many here have been exercised apply to the EU when it comes to the electoral process and so 12 April is as far as we can go without a final definitive decision and it's the EU elections and the ramifications thereof which define the end of the road.
To use a well worn phrase, nothing has changed. The options to support the WA, leave without endorsing a WA and revoking are as valid now as they were yesterday. All that has happened is that March 29th has become April 12th.
The only way to remain now however is to revoke. Back the WA and we leave on 22/5. Don't support the WA and we go on 12/4 and that's essentially it. For those opposed to the WA the dynamics of leaving haven't changed - it's a two week delay but that's all.
It does seem enough will be changed to allow the WA one more chance to clear the Commons but MV3 is the last chance - there won't be aneball parlance, "three strikes and out" for Theresa May. I don't see how she can survive a third rejection of the WA.
I think the EU has reopened avenues other than Deal/NoDeal which appeared to have been closed off yesterday. They are unlikely to be delivered by TMay, but if the HoC was minded to kick her out, I think a delegation proposing X over the next 9 months would get a warm welcome.
Except on the doorstep.
I am never sure that "the doorstep" is a very good indicator. Having done a fair amount of canvassing myself I would say that in many areas the majority don't come to the door for theave a rant. Therefore those with strong Brexit views will have a disproportionate opinion expressed versus the pragmatic majority, let alone the "don't care" contingent.
The doorstep is the single most accurate way of determing voting intention of an area and the pulse of your supporters.
Yep. In my six elections I knew after doing the first few streets that we looked good to go, and the other time that things were going to be tough.
Totally. There are pieces of information the Con canvassers miss, and pieces of information that labour canvassers miss. Because each of our supporters tell us things that they don’t tell other party canvassers.
But if you have a canvassing sheet with a relatively recent previous voting intention on there and go and canvass you have an incredibly good barometer of what’s happening.
But things can change during the election, as we say in 2017. Early canvass (and postal votes) pointed to a landslide...
HYUFD goes on about Norway Plus, I hear Common Market 2.0 mentioned but to what extent are any of these options simply obfuscations just like a second vote?
The EU have agreed a WA - that's what is on the table, nothing else. They have now said there will be no further negotiation so all these other ideas, plans and theories have no significance.
If we Revoke A50 and re-commence negotiations say three months down the road we can negotiate a Norway Plus or Common Market 2.0 based on the fact said option would likely command a majority in the Commons but that's not where we are as of now.
In the same way, voting against No Deal doesn't and hasn't prevented it. We leave on April 12th if we haven't agreed the WA and haven't revoked. There won't be another extension from the EU because of the Parliamentary elections so if we have nothing we leave with nothing.
I think the key points here are that solutions like Norway draw from existing arrangements, and so are already specified in detail and don't need to be designed bespoke from scratch like the WA (and, of course, problems like the Irish border go away if there's also a CU). And that the EU has been talking to a lot of opposition politicians already - not just the government.
If they are any good at their job, both sides will have an idea of what sort of deal could easily be struck. Indeed my guess is that Labour has at least an outline understanding around its deal already.
HYUFD goes on about Norway Plus, I hear Common Market 2.0 mentioned but to what extent are any of these options simply obfuscations just like a second vote?
The EU have agreed a WA - that's what is on the table, nothing else. They have now said there will be no further negotiation so all these other ideas, plans and theories have no significance.
If we Revoke A50 and re-commence negotiations say three months down the road we can negotiate a Norway Plus or Common Market 2.0 based on the fact said option would likely command a majority in the Commons but that's not where we are as of now.
In the same way, voting against No Deal doesn't and hasn't prevented it. We leave on April 12th if we haven't agreed the WA and haven't revoked. There won't be another extension from the EU because of the Parliamentary elections so if we have nothing we leave with nothing.
It's grandstanding nonsense. There is zero reason why a Norway option, or permanent customs union can't be negotiated during the transition period.
The can gets another short kick down the road it seems. Both the EU and to an extent Theresa may have looked over the cliff edge and stepped back though not very far. The legalities with which so many here have been exercised apply to the EU when it comes to the electoral process and so 12 April is as far as we can go without a final definitive decision and it's the EU elections and the ramifications thereof which define the end of the road.
To use a well worn phrase, nothing has changed. The options to support the WA, leave without endorsing a WA and revoking are as valid now as they were yesterday. All that has happened is that March 29th has become April 12th.
The only way to remain now however is to revoke. Back the WA and we leave on 22/5. Don't support the WA and we go on 12/4 and that's essentially it. For those opposed to the WA the dynamics of leaving haven't changed - it's a two week delay but that's all.
It does seem enough will be changed to allow the WA one more chance to clear the Commons but MV3 is the last chance - there won't be an MV4.
Where are we politically? May has probably done enough to survive until the WA and is surely hoping worried Council candidates and frightened Mail-clutching constituents will help sway wavering hardliners into line. Maybe but she now has to bring the MV back even if she knows it will fall again and I do think it will be, to coin a baseball parlance, "three strikes and out" for Theresa May. I don't see how she can survive a third rejection of the WA.
I think the EU has reopened avenues other than Deal/NoDeal which appeared to have been closed off yesterday. They are unlikely to be delivered by TMay, but if the HoC was minded to kick her out, I think a delegation proposing X over the next 9 months would get a warm welcome.
Except on the doorstep.
I am never sure that "the doorstep" is a very good indicator. Having done a fair amount of canvassing myself I would say that in many areas the majority don't come to the door for the reason that they don't want to engage. They generally hide if they see anyone with a rosette, unless they are the type that like to engage in politics, or want to have a rant. Therefore those with strong Brexit views will have a disproportionate opinion expressed versus the pragmatic majority, let alone the "don't care" contingent.
The doorstep is the single most accurate way of determing voting intention of an area and the pulse of your supporters.
Wasn't Herdson's 2017 moment de crise largely based on doorsteps?
Mr. Mark, the bourgeois decadence of cheese and biscuits cannot be tolerated by the representative of the workers of Britain!
As an aside, cheese was one of the main staples, along with bread, of peasantry in the 14th century. Apart from bread itself, it's hard to get less peasanty than cheese.
And you think continued FoM respects the result of the referendum?
Or just the bits of the result you like?
As fellow posters on both sides if the debate very correctly point out, the vote was to Remain or Leave the EU. Norway respects that result absolutely which is why I and others campaigned on that basis for Leave.
Up to a point, Lord Copper.
But I don't recall 'We can LEAVE and keep FoM' featuring prominently, or indeed at all, in the Leave campaign.
Lots of mendacious bullshit and xenophobic guff was uttered in the campaign. Who cares? There was nothing about FOM on the ballot.
Richard is right, and has been consistently right on this point from the outset.
I'm in favour of FoM and wish we weren't leaving - but worry what doing/keeping either will do to our democracy.
But by all means - ignore what voters want and see where that gets you.
If Labour pushes Norway, it risks pissing off those Remainers who don't want to Leave at all, and those of its Leavers who hadn't realised Labour was pushing to allow Romanian beggars to continue to travel to the UK....
There's going to be a reckoning at some point.
The only measure that really matters now is whether it is better than leaving in a couple of weeks with no deal and no significant planning. Very, very few Labour voters would want a No Deal Brexit.
Many of the anti-FOM leavers will have noticed by now that as EU immigration is falling, non-EU immigration is rising and I am not at all sure that is what they had in mind
Which is irrelevant in terms of Brexit as Brexit could only ever cut EU immigration, non-EU immigration could be cut even if we cancel Brexit completely and stay in the EU
My point is that the government seems to have little intention of cutting immigration per se so they will be replacing one sort with another. I am pretty sure that most leavers that voted primarily on the immigration issue actually had substantially reducing immigration in mind.
I appreciate that once out of the EU we can "control" all immigration but if that is not what we are actually going to do we will have sacrificed a hell of a lot to be exactly where we were but with different faces.
Non-EU immigration hasn't replaced EU immigration its in addition but separate to it.
And you think continued FoM respects the result of the referendum?
Or just the bits of the result you like?
As fellow posters on both sides if the debate very correctly point out, the vote was to Remain or Leave the EU. Norway respects that result absolutely which is why I and others campaigned on that basis for Leave.
Up to a point, Lord Copper.
But I don't recall 'We can LEAVE and keep FoM' featuring prominently, or indeed at all, in the Leave campaign.
Lots of mendacious bullshit and xenophobic guff was uttered in the campaign. Who cares? There was nothing about FOM on the ballot.
Richard is right, and has been consistently right on this point from the outset.
I'm in favour of FoM and wish we weren't leaving - but worry what doing/keeping either will do to our democracy.
But by all means - ignore what voters want and see where that gets you.
If Labour pushes Norway, it risks pissing off those Remainers who don't want to Leave at all, and those of its Leavers who hadn't realised Labour was pushing to allow Romanian beggars to continue to travel to the UK....
There's going to be a reckoning at some point.
The only measure that really matters now is whether it is better than leaving in a couple of weeks with no deal and no significant planning. Very, very few Labour voters would want a No Deal Brexit.
Many of the anti-FOM leavers will have noticed by now that as EU immigration is falling, non-EU immigration is rising and I am not at all sure that is what they had in mind
To be fair, it is what the Leave campaign itself promised. Although strangely it was a promise made only to Asian voters.
Actually no it was widely publicised. I've always been a fan of migration and free movement but actually when I stopped to think about it, this was something that encouraged me to switch from Remain to Leave. I grew up in Australia and my Australian friends find it harder to come to the UK than someone from Poland or Romania etc - I didn't and still don't think that is appropriate.
If we make the controls universal then that is fairer on everyone.
It is now time for May to choose. She needs to ditch the ERG and accept Benn's offer to vote for her deal with a referendum. It is the only way she can act in the national interest.
That has gone with yesterdays 12th April deadline. No referendum now possible
Make a plan for a referendum and get a longer extension.
The only plan would have to be to pass the enabling legislation through the HOC by the 12th April. It is not possible. Extension beyond the 12th April has evaporated other than to 22nd May with a deal
Ho hum another 3 weeks of these bozos faffing about
Yes unfortunately. Given they will all believe they can get what they want in those 3 weeks that ensures MV3 is lost, so were back to hoping parliament can this time come up with something. At least the EU have demanded the deal be voted on next week so that it can be ruled out.
It could all be done in a day. Vote vote vote until a majority is reached. That's not rushed they've had months.
If Letwin Benn passes on Monday that is precisely what will happen
Has anything been confirmed for monday
Yes Letwin Benn will be submitted on Monday to propose indicative votes and Letwin says at least 5 MPs have switched to the amendmemt which should see it pass as it only lost by 2 votes last time
Assuming none go the other way.....
May's bad faith around Lidlington's promise, the longer extension, and her TV broadcast, should see it through this time, I'd have thought. Particularly as the EU deal is crafted to allow it to happen.
Yep. Hilarious that just as May went all demob happy with that speech, the EU extended her tour of duty.
If you love Indian restaurants but loathe Chinese restaurant, and your wife loves Chinese restaurants but loathes Indian restaurants, insisting on one Asian cuisine or the other is unlikely to lead to enjoyable nights out.
Better to compromise on French or Italian food, which is neither partner’s first choice. More compromise, happier couple, healthier sex life.
The can gets another short kick down the road it seems. Both the EU and to an extent Theresa may have looked over the cliff edge and stepped back though not very far. The legalities with which so many here have bead.
The only way to remain now however is to revoke. Back the WA and we leave on 22/5. Don't support the WA and we go on 12/4 and that's essentially it. For those opposed to the WA the dynamics of leaving haven't changed - it's a two week delay but that's all.
It does seem enough will be changed to allow the WA one more chance to clear the Commons but MV3 is the last chance - there won't be aneball parlance, "three strikes and out" for Theresa May. I don't see how she can survive a third rejection of the WA.
I think the EU has reopened avenues other than Deal/NoDeal which appeared to have been closed off yesterday. They are unlikely to be delivered by TMay, but if the HoC was minded to kick her out, I think a delegation proposing X over the next 9 months would get a warm welcome.
Except on the doorstep.
I am never sure that "the doorstep" is a very good indicator. Having done a fair amount of canvassing myself I would say that in many areas the majority don't come to the door for theave a rant. Therefore those with strong Brexit views will have a disproportionate opinion expressed versus the pragmatic majority, let alone the "don't care" contingent.
The doorstep is the single most accurate way of determing voting intention of an area and the pulse of your supporters.
Yep. In my six elections I knew after doing the first few streets that we looked good to go, and the other time that things were going to be tough.
Totally. There are pieces of information the Con canvassers miss, and pieces of information that labour canvassers miss. Because each of our supporters tell us things that they don’t tell other party canvassers.
But if you have a canvassing sheet with a relatively recent previous voting intention on there and go and canvass you have an incredibly good barometer of what’s happening.
But things can change during the election, as we say in 2017. Early canvass (and postal votes) pointed to a landslide...
Absolutely - if you know the street and have good records, you don't need to do more than a night or two before getting a good feel. It's easier as a LibDem canvasser because telling your opponents' supporters apart is so much easier. My local Tories told me they struggled to work out our support from the general refusals.
Of course, getting to Norway probably leaves the requirement to vote for the MV, which is higly unlikey...so how will it happen?
MV3 gets voted down, MV4 gets effectively amended to WA + softer PD by a Powell/Letwin amendment of sorts and gets passed. The legal effect to the EU of May's original deal remains as was in MV3 but the course is set for a softer brexit after transition.
The PD can be changed after the fact, so really why is Corbyn/Labour no pushing for the WA and then changing it over next few years to a CU??
Answer, becuase defeating the government is more important than this country to them.
Mr. Mark, the bourgeois decadence of cheese and biscuits cannot be tolerated by the representative of the workers of Britain!
As an aside, cheese was one of the main staples, along with bread, of peasantry in the 14th century. Apart from bread itself, it's hard to get less peasanty than cheese.
It is now time for May to choose. She needs to ditch the ERG and accept Benn's offer to vote for her deal with a referendum. It is the only way she can act in the national interest.
That has gone with yesterdays 12th April deadline. No referendum now possible
Not so (although I agree the support probably isn't there). We have three weeks to come up with a plan, and then ask for the longer - probably nine month - extension that May intended to ask for before she was nobbled. Nine months is long enough for a referendum to feature within that plan, if that is what MPs decide.
A plan is not legislation. It has to be enabled by the HOC to stand in the EU elections in May
It is not negotiable by the EU, it is EU law to legitimise their new EU Parliament. It is not going to happen in three weeks
Mr. Divvie, I could be wrong, but I have a vague memory of turnips coming into vogue a bit later.
That said, the book I got said dietary knowledge from was The Time Traveller's Guide to Medieval England, so it's possible turnips were popular in medieval Scotland.
It is now time for May to choose. She needs to ditch the ERG and accept Benn's offer to vote for her deal with a referendum. It is the only way she can act in the national interest.
That has gone with yesterdays 12th April deadline. No referendum now possible
Make a plan for a referendum and get a longer extension.
The only plan would have to be to pass the enabling legislation through the HOC by the 12th April. It is not possible. Extension beyond the 12th April has evaporated other than to 22nd May with a deal
I don't think we would have to pass the legislation - if the HoC voted overwhelmingly for it (or with a substantial majority) and the government said it would do it and started preparation then the PM (thats the tricky bit, it can hardly be May, but how do they install a replacement in time?) goes to Brussels and says 'can we have a long extension so we can hold a referendum and we're taking part in the EUP elections' I'm sure he EU would be happy to say 'ok'.
It is now time for May to choose. She needs to ditch the ERG and accept Benn's offer to vote for her deal with a referendum. It is the only way she can act in the national interest.
That has gone with yesterdays 12th April deadline. No referendum now possible
Not so (although I agree the support probably isn't there). We have three weeks to come up with a plan, and then ask for the longer - probably nine month - extension that May intended to ask for before she was nobbled. Nine months is long enough for a referendum to feature within that plan, if that is what MPs decide.
A plan is not legislation. It has to be enabled by the HOC to stand in the EU elections in May
It is not negotiable by the EU, it is EU law to legitimise their new EU Parliament. It is not going to happen in three weeks
If we go beyond now 11April? We're holding the EU elections, full stop. Especially if theres a option of a referedum.
I do not want to be disenfranched at the EU parliment if we remain part of the EU.
It is now time for May to choose. She needs to ditch the ERG and accept Benn's offer to vote for her deal with a referendum. It is the only way she can act in the national interest.
That has gone with yesterdays 12th April deadline. No referendum now possible
Make a plan for a referendum and get a longer extension.
The only plan would have to be to pass the enabling legislation through the HOC by the 12th April. It is not possible. Extension beyond the 12th April has evaporated other than to 22nd May with a deal
You seem to be assuming the EU won't allow an extension on the basis of a plan for a referendum, only a fully legislated referendum. I don't see why you'd think that.
Catching up on last night's TW, I see Portillo thinks May's deal and no deal are both off the table and that we wont revoke; Parliament will probably take control and come up with a solution unacceptable to May, hence she resigns in the next few weeks and is replaced by an interim leader, probably Lidlington, who goes for a long extension, during which mayhem breaks out in the Tory party.
First time for a while that I agree with him on how things will play out.
If you love Indian restaurants but loathe Chinese restaurant, and your wife loves Chinese restaurants but loathes Indian restaurants, insisting on one Asian cuisine or the other is unlikely to lead to enjoyable nights out.
Better to compromise on French or Italian food, which is neither partner’s first choice. More compromise, happier couple, healthier sex life.
It is now time for May to choose. She needs to ditch the ERG and accept Benn's offer to vote for her deal with a referendum. It is the only way she can act in the national interest.
That has gone with yesterdays 12th April deadline. No referendum now possible
Make a plan for a referendum and get a longer extension.
The only plan would have to be to pass the enabling legislation through the HOC by the 12th April. It is not possible. Extension beyond the 12th April has evaporated other than to 22nd May with a deal
You seem to be assuming the EU won't allow an extension on the basis of a plan for a referendum, only a fully legislated referendum. I don't see why you'd think that.
Because the EU doesn't trust our MPs not to fuck it up....
The can gets another short kick down the road it seems. Both the EU and to an extent Theresa may have looked over the cliff edge and stepped back though not very far. The legalities with which so many here have been exercised apply to the EU when it comes to the electoral process and so 12 April is as far as we can go without a final definitive decision and it's the EU elections and the ramifications thereof which define the end of the road.
To use a well worn phrase, nothing has changed. The options to support the WA, leave without endorsing a WA and revoking are as valid now as they were yesterday. All that has happened is that March 29th has become April 12th.
The only way to remain now however is to revoke. Back the WA and we leave on 22/5. Don't support the WA and we go on 12/4 and that's essentially it. For those opposed to the WA the dynamics of leaving haven't changed - it's a two week delay but that's all.
It does seem enough will be changed to allow the WA one more chance to clear the Commons but MV3 is the last chance - there won't be an MV4.
Where are we politically? May has probably done enough to survive until the WA and is surely hoping worried Council candidates and frightened Mail-clutching constituents will help sway wavering hardliners into line. Maybe but she now has to bring the MV back even if she knows it will fall again and I do think it will be, to coin a baseball parlance, "three strikes and out" for Theresa May. I don't see how she can survive a third rejection of the WA.
I think the EU has reopened avenues other than Deal/NoDeal which appeared to have been closed off yesterday. They are unlikely to be delivered by TMay, but if the HoC was minded to kick her out, I think a delegation proposing X over the next 9 months would get a warm welcome.
Except on the doorstep.
I am never sure that "the doorstep" is a very good indicator. Having done a fair amount of canvassing myself I would say that in many areas the majority don't come to the door for the reason that they don't want to engage. They generally hide if they see anyone with a rosette, unless they are the type that like to engage in politics, or want to have a rant. Therefore those with strong Brexit views will have a disproportionate opinion expressed versus the pragmatic majority, let alone the "don't care" contingent.
Canvassing is a very good way of identifying supporters, but not opponents.
Of course, getting to Norway probably leaves the requirement to vote for the MV, which is higly unlikey...so how will it happen?
MV3 gets voted down, MV4 gets effectively amended to WA + softer PD by a Powell/Letwin amendment of sorts and gets passed. The legal effect to the EU of May's original deal remains as was in MV3 but the course is set for a softer brexit after transition.
The PD can be changed after the fact, so really why is Corbyn/Labour no pushing for the WA and then changing it over next few years to a CU??
Answer, becuase defeating the government is more important than this country to them.
It is now time for May to choose. She needs to ditch the ERG and accept Benn's offer to vote for her deal with a referendum. It is the only way she can act in the national interest.
That has gone with yesterdays 12th April deadline. No referendum now possible
Nah, they said they'd consider a longer extension for a "plan B". That includes a referendum
I do not want to be argumentative but many posters on here do not understand the EU position on this
I have for days said that without UK participation in the EU elections in May those elections become void in EU law if we are still a member. It is precisely for this reason the EU agreed the date of the 12th April for us to have passed the enabling legislation to take part, and that is not going to happen
It is now time for May to choose. She needs to ditch the ERG and accept Benn's offer to vote for her deal with a referendum. It is the only way she can act in the national interest.
That has gone with yesterdays 12th April deadline. No referendum now possible
Make a plan for a referendum and get a longer extension.
The only plan would have to be to pass the enabling legislation through the HOC by the 12th April. It is not possible. Extension beyond the 12th April has evaporated other than to 22nd May with a deal
You seem to be assuming the EU won't allow an extension on the basis of a plan for a referendum, only a fully legislated referendum. I don't see why you'd think that.
Because the EU doesn't trust our MPs not to fuck it up....
The numbers are miles off for a referendum in the HoC, much closer for a soft Brexit.
Catching up on last night's TW, I see Portillo thinks May's deal and no deal are both off the table and that we wont revoke; Parliament will probably take control and come up with a solution unacceptable to May, hence she resigns in the next few weeks and is replaced by an interim leader, probably Lidlington, who goes for a long extension, during which mayhem breaks out in the Tory party.
First time for a while that I agree with him on how things will play out.
HYUFD goes on about Norway Plus, I hear Common Market 2.0 mentioned but to what extent are any of these options simply obfuscations just like a second vote?
The EU have agreed a WA - that's what is on the table, nothing else. They have now said there will be no further negotiation so all these other ideas, plans and theories have no significance.
If we Revoke A50 and re-commence negotiations say three months down the road we can negotiate a Norway Plus or Common Market 2.0 based on the fact said option would likely command a majority in the Commons but that's not where we are as of now.
In the same way, voting against No Deal doesn't and hasn't prevented it. We leave on April 12th if we haven't agreed the WA and haven't revoked. There won't be another extension from the EU because of the Parliamentary elections so if we have nothing we leave with nothing.
It's grandstanding nonsense. There is zero reason why a Norway option, or permanent customs union can't be negotiated during the transition period.
In theory no, there is not, but in practice there is little chance either of these options would survive being defined in detail, written down in documents of, say, 585 pages and put to the House of Commons. At that point all the disadvantages of them would become clear, and MPs would find lots of reasons to oppose them. Hard leavers would say they did not deliver on the referendum and hard remainers are now convinced they can reverse the whole process so they have no incentive to agree any deal short of revocation or a second referendum. Without the support of one of these groups it will not be possible to get any deal through Parliament. And polling suggests that there is little public support for a Norway route.
HYUFD goes on about Norway Plus, I hear Common Market 2.0 mentioned but to what extent are any of these options simply obfuscations just like a second vote?
The EU have agreed a WA - that's what is on the table, nothing else. They have now said there will be no further negotiation so all these other ideas, plans and theories have no significance.
If we Revoke A50 and re-commence negotiations say three months down the road we can negotiate a Norway Plus or Common Market 2.0 based on the fact said option would likely command a majority in the Commons but that's not where we are as of now.
In the same way, voting against No Deal doesn't and hasn't prevented it. We leave on April 12th if we haven't agreed the WA and haven't revoked. There won't be another extension from the EU because of the Parliamentary elections so if we have nothing we leave with nothing.
There was quite a slap from Tusk about the HoC voting against things not being the same as them not happening - all roads to exit go through the WA - Labour could easily support the WA but choose not to. Labour accept the WA is as it is, but still won't vote for the deal as the government proposing it is tory.
The argument is that there is no requirement on Labour to help a split tory party and that's true but let's not pretend the Luxembourg premier is wrong - politicians in the UK are handling the problem as a matter of party competition not international deal-making. I am disappointed the EU have been so bendy as all it's done is leave the unicorn hunters convinced their own particular unicorn is still available.
It is now time for May to choose. She needs to ditch the ERG and accept Benn's offer to vote for her deal with a referendum. It is the only way she can act in the national interest.
That has gone with yesterdays 12th April deadline. No referendum now possible
Make a plan for a referendum and get a longer extension.
The only plan would have to be to pass the enabling legislation through the HOC by the 12th April. It is not possible. Extension beyond the 12th April has evaporated other than to 22nd May with a deal
You seem to be assuming the EU won't allow an extension on the basis of a plan for a referendum, only a fully legislated referendum. I don't see why you'd think that.
No - Any delay requires us to elect MEPs in May.
We have to enable that with legislation by 12th April and it is not possible in the time and with the huge opposition it would face from ERG and others
It is now time for May to choose. She needs to ditch the ERG and accept Benn's offer to vote for her deal with a referendum. It is the only way she can act in the national interest.
That has gone with yesterdays 12th April deadline. No referendum now possible
Make a plan for a referendum and get a longer extension.
The only plan would have to be to pass the enabling legislation through the HOC by the 12th April. It is not possible. Extension beyond the 12th April has evaporated other than to 22nd May with a deal
You seem to be assuming the EU won't allow an extension on the basis of a plan for a referendum, only a fully legislated referendum. I don't see why you'd think that.
Because the EU doesn't trust our MPs not to fuck it up....
It doesn't have to, a delay doesn't cost them anything.
The only bit they need to make sure the British don't fuck up is scheduling the Euro elections. That's what the British will have to pass to get a new extension.
I've just thought of something and again perhaps the knowledgeable on here will help.
As I understand it, IF we pass the WA, we will still effectively leave on 22/5 - the date prevents us having to get involved in the EU parliamentary elections - but the Transition period, backstop and all the rest of it kick in so we are in effect still members (though without any say) until 31/12/20 or whenever.
If we don't pass the WA and we don't revoke, we leave without a Deal on 12/4 - that's it. We would then have to move forward with trade negotiations round the world.
If we chose to Revoke we would have to do so before 12/4 because we would then still be full members and would legally have to participate in the EU parliamentary elections. Revocation simply ends the cancellation of this A50 process and doesn't stop us re-instigating A50 in the summer or autumn and re-setting the clock.
Have I got this and would I be right in thinking second votes, GE, alternative options and the like are all just smoke and mirrors?
It is now time for May to choose. She needs to ditch the ERG and accept Benn's offer to vote for her deal with a referendum. It is the only way she can act in the national interest.
That has gone with yesterdays 12th April deadline. No referendum now possible
Make a plan for a referendum and get a longer extension.
The only plan would have to be to pass the enabling legislation through the HOC by the 12th April. It is not possible. Extension beyond the 12th April has evaporated other than to 22nd May with a deal
I don't think we would have to pass the legislation - if the HoC voted overwhelmingly for it (or with a substantial majority) and the government said it would do it and started preparation then the PM (thats the tricky bit, it can hardly be May, but how do they install a replacement in time?) goes to Brussels and says 'can we have a long extension so we can hold a referendum and we're taking part in the EUP elections' I'm sure he EU would be happy to say 'ok'.
Nope - It has to be in law that we stand in the EU elections
Mr. Anazina, perhaps that every country to the east of Cyprus (excepting, of course, any African nations, I'd guess Madagascar might otherwise fit the bill) is in Asia.
So Norway is in Asia? You should be Grayling's Chief of Staff.
It is now time for May to choose. She needs to ditch the ERG and accept Benn's offer to vote for her deal with a referendum. It is the only way she can act in the national interest.
That has gone with yesterdays 12th April deadline. No referendum now possible
Nah, they said they'd consider a longer extension for a "plan B". That includes a referendum
I do not want to be argumentative but many posters on here do not understand the EU position on this
I have for days said that without UK participation in the EU elections in May those elections become void in EU law if we are still a member. It is precisely for this reason the EU agreed the date of the 12th April for us to have passed the enabling legislation to take part, and that is not going to happen
Referendum and GE are out of the equation
TM deal - amended deal - no deal - revoke
Nothing else
The EU has already said a longer extension is still on the table - and May was going to ask for one, having already cleared her lines with the EU, until she was nobbled in cabinet.
If a longer extension is possible then a referendum is possible. The question is whether there is support for it, not whether it is practical. I don't sense there is support for it up front as a choice, but I can see it emerging as the deal breaker between different choices.
And you think continued FoM respects the result of the referendum?
Or just the bits of the result you like?
Do you think those Leave voters bothered about FoM are happy with the fact that non-EU immigration has gone up since the referendum and EU migration is down. Are they whooping with delight at this and at the prospect of even more migrants coming in from the far corners of the world, the sorts of migrants that the Leave campaigns were so intent on putting on their posters?
It is now time for May to choose. She needs to ditch the ERG and accept Benn's offer to vote for her deal with a referendum. It is the only way she can act in the national interest.
That has gone with yesterdays 12th April deadline. No referendum now possible
Nah, they said they'd consider a longer extension for a "plan B". That includes a referendum
I do not want to be argumentative but many posters on here do not understand the EU position on this
I have for days said that without UK participation in the EU elections in May those elections become void in EU law if we are still a member. It is precisely for this reason the EU agreed the date of the 12th April for us to have passed the enabling legislation to take part, and that is not going to happen
Referendum and GE are out of the equation
TM deal - amended deal - no deal - revoke
Nothing else
Well obviously if you take it as a given that parliament won't pass the legislation, then it's not an option. You can say that for anything except no deal. When I say something is an option I mean it is available for parliament to choose, not that they will. I think that's what most other people mean too.
It is now time for May to choose. She needs to ditch the ERG and accept Benn's offer to vote for her deal with a referendum. It is the only way she can act in the national interest.
That has gone with yesterdays 12th April deadline. No referendum now possible
Not so (although I agree the support probably isn't there). We have three weeks to come up with a plan, and then ask for the longer - probably nine month - extension that May intended to ask for before she was nobbled. Nine months is long enough for a referendum to feature within that plan, if that is what MPs decide.
A plan is not legislation. It has to be enabled by the HOC to stand in the EU elections in May
It is not negotiable by the EU, it is EU law to legitimise their new EU Parliament. It is not going to happen in three weeks
If we go beyond now 11April? We're holding the EU elections, full stop. Especially if theres a option of a referedum.
I do not want to be disenfranched at the EU parliment if we remain part of the EU.
We are not holding EU elections without enabling legislation and of course your last sentence is exactly the reason the EU put the 12th April cut off date.
At present the UK cannot and is not taking part in the EU elections
I've just thought of something and again perhaps the knowledgeable on here will help.
As I understand it, IF we pass the WA, we will still effectively leave on 22/5 - the date prevents us having to get involved in the EU parliamentary elections - but the Transition period, backstop and all the rest of it kick in so we are in effect still members (though without any say) until 31/12/20 or whenever.
If we don't pass the WA and we don't revoke, we leave without a Deal on 12/4 - that's it. We would then have to move forward with trade negotiations round the world.
If we chose to Revoke we would have to do so before 12/4 because we would then still be full members and would legally have to participate in the EU parliamentary elections. Revocation simply ends the cancellation of this A50 process and doesn't stop us re-instigating A50 in the summer or autumn and re-setting the clock.
Have I got this and would I be right in thinking second votes, GE, alternative options and the like are all just smoke and mirrors?
No because a further option is to agree an alternative plan (#peoplesvote/GE/completely different objectives) by 12 April, pass a Euro elections enabling bill, and for the EU to arrange a longer extension. More complex, but viable.
It is now time for May to choose. She needs to ditch the ERG and accept Benn's offer to vote for her deal with a referendum. It is the only way she can act in the national interest.
That has gone with yesterdays 12th April deadline. No referendum now possible
Nah, they said they'd consider a longer extension for a "plan B". That includes a referendum
I do not want to be argumentative but many posters on here do not understand the EU position on this
I have for days said that without UK participation in the EU elections in May those elections become void in EU law if we are still a member. It is precisely for this reason the EU agreed the date of the 12th April for us to have passed the enabling legislation to take part, and that is not going to happen
Referendum and GE are out of the equation
TM deal - amended deal - no deal - revoke
Nothing else
Well obviously if you take it as a given that parliament won't pass the legislation, then it's not an option. You can say that for anything except no deal. When I say something is an option I mean it is available for parliament to choose, not that they will. I think that's what most other people mean too.
I'm not sure most people include "ain't going to happens" in the list of possible outcomes.
It's an option that I will be spending tonight with Margot Robbie. But I'm not wearing my magic pants, on the off-chance.....
It is now time for May to choose. She needs to ditch the ERG and accept Benn's offer to vote for her deal with a referendum. It is the only way she can act in the national interest.
That has gone with yesterdays 12th April deadline. No referendum now possible
Not so (although I agree the support probably isn't there). We have three weeks to come up with a plan, and then ask for the longer - probably nine month - extension that May intended to ask for before she was nobbled. Nine months is long enough for a referendum to feature within that plan, if that is what MPs decide.
A plan is not legislation. It has to be enabled by the HOC to stand in the EU elections in May
It is not negotiable by the EU, it is EU law to legitimise their new EU Parliament. It is not going to happen in three weeks
We don't need a negotiated deal in order to get an extension. We just need an objective and a plan.
It is now time for May to choose. She needs to ditch the ERG and accept Benn's offer to vote for her deal with a referendum. It is the only way she can act in the national interest.
That has gone with yesterdays 12th April deadline. No referendum now possible
Make a plan for a referendum and get a longer extension.
The only plan would have to be to pass the enabling legislation through the HOC by the 12th April. It is not possible. Extension beyond the 12th April has evaporated other than to 22nd May with a deal
You seem to be assuming the EU won't allow an extension on the basis of a plan for a referendum, only a fully legislated referendum. I don't see why you'd think that.
Because the EU doesn't trust our MPs not to fuck it up....
It doesn't have to, a delay doesn't cost them anything.
The only bit they need to make sure the British don't fuck up is scheduling the Euro elections. That's what the British will have to pass to get a new extension.
What is remarkable about the EU decision is not that it elegantly allows May one more chance (while removing the immediate No Deal blackmail threat from her armoury), subject to a tight deadline, removes the possibility of any further can kicking on her part, while still leaving options open to Parliament... it is that a group of nations with differing interests managed to formulate and agree to so elegant a solution in so short a time.
And moreover displays a great deal of goodwill on their part.
Spot on. We may not like it, but as a political institution the EU 'works' in a way that our national politics doesn't. The senior EU politicians are all former European national leaders who have come up through PR systems where problem solving and compromise are their bread and butter.
Whereas ours are highly trained in shouting and heckling their counterparts sitting across the aisle.
It also helps that they are insulated from democratic pressure
Foreign affairs is both less important to their domestic voters and they can claim it’s and EU position.
Most of our senior politicians are personally isolated from political pressure, sitting in their safe seats. OK, their parties are exposed, but then there's a lot of political pressure within PR systems; it just works in different ways. Critically, it encourages politicians to find compromises across political divisions.
You miss my point
Within their own countries they are democratically constrained
I don’t believe a significant number of German voters, for example, will change their vote based on the EU’s negotiating position with the U.K.
Hence they are under much less pressure than May for whom it is a much more salient issue
Totally. There are pieces of information the Con canvassers miss, and pieces of information that labour canvassers miss. Because each of our supporters tell us things that they don’t tell other party canvassers.
But if you have a canvassing sheet with a relatively recent previous voting intention on there and go and canvass you have an incredibly good barometer of what’s happening.
But things can change during the election, as we say in 2017. Early canvass (and postal votes) pointed to a landslide...
Yes, I agree - like permanent polling panels, recanvassed voters give a very good impression of what's happening. Important to avoid getting lured into being encouraged by people you've not canvassed before. In 2010 when I narrowly lost, my agent said that I was well ahead on new canvasses, but going on recanvass data, I seemed to be slightly behind. And so it proved.
Catching up on last night's TW, I see Portillo thinks May's deal and no deal are both off the table and that we wont revoke; Parliament will probably take control and come up with a solution unacceptable to May, hence she resigns in the next few weeks and is replaced by an interim leader, probably Lidlington, who goes for a long extension, during which mayhem breaks out in the Tory party.
First time for a while that I agree with him on how things will play out.
Can someone explain how "parliament can take control" while May is still prime minister?
I cannot see how "parliament" can propose something to the EU without it being presented by the government, because the european council consists of 28 govenments.
May can resign and then a UK government with different personnell can take control, but as we have seen in the last month, what parliament wants puts pressure on the government, but cannot not compell it to do something it doesent want to.
This is a genuine question, as lots of people are suggesting it as a possibility but I cannot imagine how it occurs in practice
It is now time for May to choose. She needs to ditch the ERG and accept Benn's offer to vote for her deal with a referendum. It is the only way she can act in the national interest.
That has gone with yesterdays 12th April deadline. No referendum now possible
Make a plan for a referendum and get a longer extension.
The only plan would have to be to pass the enabling legislation through the HOC by the 12th April. It is not possible. Extension beyond the 12th April has evaporated other than to 22nd May with a deal
You seem to be assuming the EU won't allow an extension on the basis of a plan for a referendum, only a fully legislated referendum. I don't see why you'd think that.
No - Any delay requires us to elect MEPs in May.
We have to enable that with legislation by 12th April and it is not possible in the time and with the huge opposition it would face from ERG and others
Sorry, you just mean legislating for the Euros not for the referendum? I don't see how the ERG could kill that against opposition support.
Catching up on last night's TW, I see Portillo thinks May's deal and no deal are both off the table and that we wont revoke; Parliament will probably take control and come up with a solution unacceptable to May, hence she resigns in the next few weeks and is replaced by an interim leader, probably Lidlington, who goes for a long extension, during which mayhem breaks out in the Tory party.
First time for a while that I agree with him on how things will play out.
It is now time for May to choose. She needs to ditch the ERG and accept Benn's offer to vote for her deal with a referendum. It is the only way she can act in the national interest.
That has gone with yesterdays 12th April deadline. No referendum now possible
Make a plan for a referendum and get a longer extension.
The only plan would have to be to pass the enabling legislation through the HOC by the 12th April. It is not possible. Extension beyond the 12th April has evaporated other than to 22nd May with a deal
You seem to be assuming the EU won't allow an extension on the basis of a plan for a referendum, only a fully legislated referendum. I don't see why you'd think that.
No - Any delay requires us to elect MEPs in May.
We have to enable that with legislation by 12th April and it is not possible in the time and with the huge opposition it would face from ERG and others
It is of course so easy to propose armchair solutions.
Every proposal has a majority against it. Every proposal has a vociferous group of MPs determined to frustrate it. A referendum has a majority against in Parliament and in the country. Not least, it is a recipe for much more squabbling, as it won't deliver a clear-cut result. I don't see it happening on a short timescale.
If Revoke or Remain were so popular, I'd expect to see it in the polling of the only party that wants to undo Brexit, the LibDems. That is the kind of thing politicians would notice, a huge surge in the parties supporting Remain or Revoke.
The EU have to take control. There are two options. WA or No Deal. Do what you want, but choose.
I've just thought of something and again perhaps the knowledgeable on here will help.
As I understand it, IF we pass the WA, we will still effectively leave on 22/5 - the date prevents us having to get involved in the EU parliamentary elections - but the Transition period, backstop and all the rest of it kick in so we are in effect still members (though without any say) until 31/12/20 or whenever.
If we don't pass the WA and we don't revoke, we leave without a Deal on 12/4 - that's it. We would then have to move forward with trade negotiations round the world.
If we chose to Revoke we would have to do so before 12/4 because we would then still be full members and would legally have to participate in the EU parliamentary elections. Revocation simply ends the cancellation of this A50 process and doesn't stop us re-instigating A50 in the summer or autumn and re-setting the clock.
Have I got this and would I be right in thinking second votes, GE, alternative options and the like are all just smoke and mirrors?
No because a further option is to agree an alternative plan (#peoplesvote/GE/completely different objectives) by 12 April, pass a Euro elections enabling bill, and for the EU to arrange a longer extension. More complex, but viable.
And the EU deal contains a bloody great signpost pointing that way.
It is now time for May to choose. She needs to ditch the ERG and accept Benn's offer to vote for her deal with a referendum. It is the only way she can act in the national interest.
That has gone with yesterdays 12th April deadline. No referendum now possible
Make a plan for a referendum and get a longer extension.
The only plan would have to be to pass the enabling legislation through the HOC by the 12th April. It is not possible. Extension beyond the 12th April has evaporated other than to 22nd May with a deal
You seem to be assuming the EU won't allow an extension on the basis of a plan for a referendum, only a fully legislated referendum. I don't see why you'd think that.
Because the EU doesn't trust our MPs not to fuck it up....
It doesn't have to, a delay doesn't cost them anything.
The only bit they need to make sure the British don't fuck up is scheduling the Euro elections. That's what the British will have to pass to get a new extension.
It is now time for May to choose. She needs to ditch the ERG and accept Benn's offer to vote for her deal with a referendum. It is the only way she can act in the national interest.
That has gone with yesterdays 12th April deadline. No referendum now possible
Make a plan for a referendum and get a longer extension.
The only plan would have to be to pass the enabling legislation through the HOC by the 12th April. It is not possible. Extension beyond the 12th April has evaporated other than to 22nd May with a deal
You seem to be assuming the EU won't allow an extension on the basis of a plan for a referendum, only a fully legislated referendum. I don't see why you'd think that.
Because the EU doesn't trust our MPs not to fuck it up....
It doesn't have to, a delay doesn't cost them anything.
The only bit they need to make sure the British don't fuck up is scheduling the Euro elections. That's what the British will have to pass to get a new extension.
Indeed. It requires our MPs not to fuck that up.
They are right to be concerned.
Surely our well paid MPs will realise they need to pass the legislation if they are to avoid "No Deal" ? I bet they don't though lol
It is now time for May to choose. She needs to ditch the ERG and accept Benn's offer to vote for her deal with a referendum. It is the only way she can act in the national interest.
That has gone with yesterdays 12th April deadline. No referendum now possible
Nah, they said they'd consider a longer extension for a "plan B". That includes a referendum
I do not want to be argumentative but many posters on here do not understand the EU position on this
I have for days said that without UK participation in the EU elections in May those elections become void in EU law if we are still a member. It is precisely for this reason the EU agreed the date of the 12th April for us to have passed the enabling legislation to take part, and that is not going to happen
Referendum and GE are out of the equation
TM deal - amended deal - no deal - revoke
Nothing else
The EU has already said a longer extension is still on the table - and May was going to ask for one, having already cleared her lines with the EU, until she was nobbled in cabinet.
If a longer extension is possible then a referendum is possible. The question is whether there is support for it, not whether it is practical. I don't sense there is support for it up front as a choice, but I can see it emerging as the deal breaker between different choices.
I do find it difficult for so many posters to seem to disregard the essential path to an extension and referendum in the passing of enabling legislation for the UK to take part in the EU elections.
It is mandatory that we pass legislation in the next three weeks and in practice it will be less than that by the time journalists and mps realise how yesterday has changed so much.
Catching up on last night's TW, I see Portillo thinks May's deal and no deal are both off the table and that we wont revoke; Parliament will probably take control and come up with a solution unacceptable to May, hence she resigns in the next few weeks and is replaced by an interim leader, probably Lidlington, who goes for a long extension, during which mayhem breaks out in the Tory party.
First time for a while that I agree with him on how things will play out.
It is now time for May to choose. She needs to ditch the ERG and accept Benn's offer to vote for her deal with a referendum. It is the only way she can act in the national interest.
That has gone with yesterdays 12th April deadline. No referendum now possible
Nah, they said they'd consider a longer extension for a "plan B". That includes a referendum
I do not want to be argumentative but many posters on here do not understand the EU position on this
I have for days said that without UK participation in the EU elections in May those elections become void in EU law if we are still a member. It is precisely for this reason the EU agreed the date of the 12th April for us to have passed the enabling legislation to take part, and that is not going to happen
Referendum and GE are out of the equation
TM deal - amended deal - no deal - revoke
Nothing else
Well obviously if you take it as a given that parliament won't pass the legislation, then it's not an option. You can say that for anything except no deal. When I say something is an option I mean it is available for parliament to choose, not that they will. I think that's what most other people mean too.
It is but so are so many unicorns. It will not pass in time
It is now time for May to choose. She needs to ditch the ERG and accept Benn's offer to vote for her deal with a referendum. It is the only way she can act in the national interest.
That has gone with yesterdays 12th April deadline. No referendum now possible
Nah, they said they'd consider a longer extension for a "plan B". That includes a referendum
I do not want to be argumentative but many posters on here do not understand the EU position on this
I have for days said that without UK participation in the EU elections in May those elections become void in EU law if we are still a member. It is precisely for this reason the EU agreed the date of the 12th April for us to have passed the enabling legislation to take part, and that is not going to happen
Referendum and GE are out of the equation
TM deal - amended deal - no deal - revoke
Nothing else
The EU has already said a longer extension is still on the table - and May was going to ask for one, having already cleared her lines with the EU, until she was nobbled in cabinet.
If a longer extension is possible then a referendum is possible. The question is whether there is support for it, not whether it is practical. I don't sense there is support for it up front as a choice, but I can see it emerging as the deal breaker between different choices.
I do find it difficult for so many posters to seem to disregard the essential path to an extension and referendum in the passing of enabling legislation for the UK to take part in the EU elections.
It is mandatory that we pass legislation in the next three weeks and in practice it will be less than that by the time journalists and mps realise how yesterday has changed so much.
Revoke is all that is left for remainers
If MV3 passes, we still need to agree the Withdrawal Bill toute suite. If we can do that, we can get an election bill through.
On an administrative note, though, anyone wanting to keep Corbyn in a meeting room next week should have an emotional support terrorist on standby to help him through the process.
And you think continued FoM respects the result of the referendum?
Or just the bits of the result you like?
Do you think those Leave voters bothered about FoM are happy with the fact that non-EU immigration has gone up since the referendum and EU migration is down. Are they whooping with delight at this and at the prospect of even more migrants coming in from the far corners of the world, the sorts of migrants that the Leave campaigns were so intent on putting on their posters?
Probably not but do you think they would be happier if EU immigration was higher in addition to non-EU immigration being higher ?
It is now time for May to choose. She needs to ditch the ERG and accept Benn's offer to vote for her deal with a referendum. It is the only way she can act in the national interest.
That has gone with yesterdays 12th April deadline. No referendum now possible
Nah, they said they'd consider a longer extension for a "plan B". That includes a referendum
I do not want to be argumentative but many posters on here do not understand the EU position on this
I have for days said that without UK participation in the EU elections in May those elections become void in EU law if we are still a member. It is precisely for this reason the EU agreed the date of the 12th April for us to have passed the enabling legislation to take part, and that is not going to happen
Referendum and GE are out of the equation
TM deal - amended deal - no deal - revoke
Nothing else
Well obviously if you take it as a given that parliament won't pass the legislation, then it's not an option. You can say that for anything except no deal. When I say something is an option I mean it is available for parliament to choose, not that they will. I think that's what most other people mean too.
It seems clear that May's deal won't pass unless there's a massive shift over the next few days, and also clear that Cooper/Boles/Benn will pass, giving us indicative votes which will probably give majorities to "customs union" and "referendum", both of which have been ruled out by May up to now.
May then has three choices. She's spent three years refusing to shift her red lines,but she can pick one of the options with majority support and try to run with it. Her recent statements seem to indicate a possible willingness to do that, backing off from "as PM I will not...". She can resign. I don't think anything we've seen of her suggests she'll willingly give up. Or she can defy Parliament and say she'll let no deal happen.
In case 3, we then get an instant Labour VONC. Tory rebels then have to consider whether they will break party unity on that (=reselection death) or accept that May can ignore Parliament (=democracy death).
This price might have been correct with Macron's/Tusks original words but there is zip incentive for new Labour MPs to back it now (The 3 near me still will but noone else) and the DUP isn't on board. Add the 20 hardline ERGers in and it has v little chance.
Catching up on last night's TW, I see Portillo thinks May's deal and no deal are both off the table and that we wont revoke; Parliament will probably take control and come up with a solution unacceptable to May, hence she resigns in the next few weeks and is replaced by an interim leader, probably Lidlington, who goes for a long extension, during which mayhem breaks out in the Tory party.
First time for a while that I agree with him on how things will play out.
Can someone explain how "parliament can take control" while May is still prime minister?
I cannot see how "parliament" can propose something to the EU without it being presented by the government, because the european council consists of 28 govenments.
May can resign and then a UK government with different personnell can take control, but as we have seen in the last month, what parliament wants puts pressure on the government, but cannot not compell it to do something it doesent want to.
This is a genuine question, as lots of people are suggesting it as a possibility but I cannot imagine how it occurs in practice
Letwin passes Monday, opening Wednesday for indicative votes and hopefully thereafter a preferred option emerges. If a majority supported option emerges from this process the government can hardly (well could, but won't, in the circumstances) refuse to run with it, but May can, so she resigns. Lidlington takes over, asks and gets a nine month extension from the EU.
Edit/ as Portillo says, mayhem breaks out in the Tory party, which presumably has a leadership contest thereafter, and there is a big question about viable government. Hence a possible GE or political realignment. But that's for after.
I've just thought of something and again perhaps the knowledgeable on here will help.
As I understand it, IF we pass the WA, we will still effectively leave on 22/5 - the date prevents us having to get involved in the EU parliamentary elections - but the Transition period, backstop and all the rest of it kick in so we are in effect still members (though without any say) until 31/12/20 or whenever.
If we don't pass the WA and we don't revoke, we leave without a Deal on 12/4 - that's it. We would then have to move forward with trade negotiations round the world.
If we chose to Revoke we would have to do so before 12/4 because we would then still be full members and would legally have to participate in the EU parliamentary elections. Revocation simply ends the cancellation of this A50 process and doesn't stop us re-instigating A50 in the summer or autumn and re-setting the clock.
Have I got this and would I be right in thinking second votes, GE, alternative options and the like are all just smoke and mirrors?
No because a further option is to agree an alternative plan (#peoplesvote/GE/completely different objectives) by 12 April, pass a Euro elections enabling bill, and for the EU to arrange a longer extension. More complex, but viable.
I agree and thank you for acknowledging the enabling bill.
Nothing is impossible but in our HOC getting the enabling bill through all it stages and passing into law by the 12th April would require a single attitude of purpose by mps that is not there, and would be fought tooth and nail by ERG and others
Catching up on last night's TW, I see Portillo thinks May's deal and no deal are both off the table and that we wont revoke; Parliament will probably take control and come up with a solution unacceptable to May, hence she resigns in the next few weeks and is replaced by an interim leader, probably Lidlington, who goes for a long extension, during which mayhem breaks out in the Tory party.
First time for a while that I agree with him on how things will play out.
This price might have been correct with Macron's/Tusks original words but there is zip incentive for new Labour MPs to back it now (The 3 near me still will but noone else) and the DUP isn't on board. Add the 20 hardline ERGers in and it has v little chance.
Practically identical odds as May to leave before Brexit.
I've just thought of something and again perhaps the knowledgeable on here will help.
As I understand it, IF we pass the WA, we will still effectively leave on 22/5 - the date prevents us having to get involved in the EU parliamentary elections - but the Transition period, backstop and all the rest of it kick in so we are in effect still members (though without any say) until 31/12/20 or whenever.
If we don't pass the WA and we don't revoke, we leave without a Deal on 12/4 - that's it. We would then have to move forward with trade negotiations round the world.
If we chose to Revoke we would have to do so before 12/4 because we would then still be full members and would legally have to participate in the EU parliamentary elections. Revocation simply ends the cancellation of this A50 process and doesn't stop us re-instigating A50 in the summer or autumn and re-setting the clock.
Have I got this and would I be right in thinking second votes, GE, alternative options and the like are all just smoke and mirrors?
No because a further option is to agree an alternative plan (#peoplesvote/GE/completely different objectives) by 12 April, pass a Euro elections enabling bill, and for the EU to arrange a longer extension. More complex, but viable.
I agree and thank you for acknowledging the enabling bill.
Nothing is impossible but in our HOC getting the enabling bill through all it stages and passing into law by the 12th April would require a single attitude of purpose by mps that is not there, and would be fought tooth and nail by ERG and others
Does an enabling bill need to pass by the 12th or do we just need to commit to holding the elections by the 12th?
Catching up on last night's TW, I see Portillo thinks May's deal and no deal are both off the table and that we wont revoke; Parliament will probably take control and come up with a solution unacceptable to May, hence she resigns in the next few weeks and is replaced by an interim leader, probably Lidlington, who goes for a long extension, during which mayhem breaks out in the Tory party.
First time for a while that I agree with him on how things will play out.
Can someone explain how "parliament can take control" while May is still prime minister?
I cannot see how "parliament" can propose something to the EU without it being presented by the government, because the european council consists of 28 govenments.
May can resign and then a UK government with different personnell can take control, but as we have seen in the last month, what parliament wants puts pressure on the government, but cannot not compell it to do something it doesent want to.
This is a genuine question, as lots of people are suggesting it as a possibility but I cannot imagine how it occurs in practice
Letwin passes Monday, opening Wednesday for indicative votes and hopefully thereafter a preferred option emerges. If a majority supported option emerges from this process the government can hardly (well could, but won't, in the circumstances) refuse to run with it, but May can, so she resigns. Lidlington takes over, asks and gets a nine month extension from the EU.
Edit/ as Portillo says, mayhem breaks out in the Tory party, which presumably has a leadership contest thereafter, and there is a big question about viable government. Hence a possible GE or political realignment. But that's for after.
Asking needs the enabling legislation agreed as well
And you think continued FoM respects the result of the referendum?
Or just the bits of the result you like?
Do you think those Leave voters bothered about FoM are happy with the fact that non-EU immigration has gone up since the referendum and EU migration is down. Are they whooping with delight at this and at the prospect of even more migrants coming in from the far corners of the world, the sorts of migrants that the Leave campaigns were so intent on putting on their posters?
Probably not but do you think they would be happier if EU immigration was higher in addition to non-EU immigration being higher ?
Comments
WA remains, that's the EU's absolute red line but a very soft political declaration. No deal, May's deal, 2nd ref all out.
HYUFD goes on about Norway Plus, I hear Common Market 2.0 mentioned but to what extent are any of these options simply obfuscations just like a second vote?
The EU have agreed a WA - that's what is on the table, nothing else. They have now said there will be no further negotiation so all these other ideas, plans and theories have no significance.
If we Revoke A50 and re-commence negotiations say three months down the road we can negotiate a Norway Plus or Common Market 2.0 based on the fact said option would likely command a majority in the Commons but that's not where we are as of now.
In the same way, voting against No Deal doesn't and hasn't prevented it. We leave on April 12th if we haven't agreed the WA and haven't revoked. There won't be another extension from the EU because of the Parliamentary elections so if we have nothing we leave with nothing.
"Opioids crisis
Sackler family: 500 cities, counties and tribes sue owners of Oxycontin maker
Vast lawsuit accuses family of helping to create ‘worst drug crisis in American history’"
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/mar/21/sackler-family-500-cities-counties-and-tribes-sue-oxycontin-maker
Identifying what motivated most Leave voters does not give any sort of sensible basis to come up with a plan which works for the future for the whole country, which is what was and is needed. It is backward looking. When what a leader needs to do is to work from that, try to address those concerns but develop a plan that works for the future because:-
(a) If it is going to work and last it needs to have consent from as wide a group as possible and needs to meet the challenges of the future; and
(b) those voters will - if the plan turns out to be crap - complain just as loudly and forget their own reasons. They won't hold themselves to account. They may change their views or consider other aspects more important over time. So you need to be flexible enough to think ahead.
There were plenty of ways of addressing voters' concerns about immigration without getting into this mess. And look where we are now - with immigration as high as ever and the non-EU immigration over which the country has always had control higher than it has ever been.
But if you have a canvassing sheet with a relatively recent previous voting intention on there and go and canvass you have an incredibly good barometer of what’s happening.
But things can change during the election, as we say in 2017. Early canvass (and postal votes) pointed to a landslide...
If they are any good at their job, both sides will have an idea of what sort of deal could easily be struck. Indeed my guess is that Labour has at least an outline understanding around its deal already.
As an aside, cheese was one of the main staples, along with bread, of peasantry in the 14th century. Apart from bread itself, it's hard to get less peasanty than cheese.
Edited extra bit: ahem, more* peasanty
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1109027583360987141
The Universities and Museums and Galleries are disowning their money as too dirty -- rightly too.
Answer, becuase defeating the government is more important than this country to them.
It is not negotiable by the EU, it is EU law to legitimise their new EU Parliament. It is not going to happen in three weeks
That said, the book I got said dietary knowledge from was The Time Traveller's Guide to Medieval England, so it's possible turnips were popular in medieval Scotland.
I do not want to be disenfranched at the EU parliment if we remain part of the EU.
First time for a while that I agree with him on how things will play out.
I have for days said that without UK participation in the EU elections in May those elections become void in EU law if we are still a member. It is precisely for this reason the EU agreed the date of the 12th April for us to have passed the enabling legislation to take part, and that is not going to happen
Referendum and GE are out of the equation
TM deal - amended deal - no deal - revoke
Nothing else
The argument is that there is no requirement on Labour to help a split tory party and that's true but let's not pretend the Luxembourg premier is wrong - politicians in the UK are handling the problem as a matter of party competition not international deal-making. I am disappointed the EU have been so bendy as all it's done is leave the unicorn hunters convinced their own particular unicorn is still available.
We have to enable that with legislation by 12th April and it is not possible in the time and with the huge opposition it would face from ERG and others
The only bit they need to make sure the British don't fuck up is scheduling the Euro elections. That's what the British will have to pass to get a new extension.
As I understand it, IF we pass the WA, we will still effectively leave on 22/5 - the date prevents us having to get involved in the EU parliamentary elections - but the Transition period, backstop and all the rest of it kick in so we are in effect still members (though without any say) until 31/12/20 or whenever.
If we don't pass the WA and we don't revoke, we leave without a Deal on 12/4 - that's it. We would then have to move forward with trade negotiations round the world.
If we chose to Revoke we would have to do so before 12/4 because we would then still be full members and would legally have to participate in the EU parliamentary elections. Revocation simply ends the cancellation of this A50 process and doesn't stop us re-instigating A50 in the summer or autumn and re-setting the clock.
Have I got this and would I be right in thinking second votes, GE, alternative options and the like are all just smoke and mirrors?
If a longer extension is possible then a referendum is possible. The question is whether there is support for it, not whether it is practical. I don't sense there is support for it up front as a choice, but I can see it emerging as the deal breaker between different choices.
At present the UK cannot and is not taking part in the EU elections
Complete and utter wastes of space. #ToriesOut
It's an option that I will be spending tonight with Margot Robbie. But I'm not wearing my magic pants, on the off-chance.....
Within their own countries they are democratically constrained
I don’t believe a significant number of German voters, for example, will change their vote based on the EU’s negotiating position with the U.K.
Hence they are under much less pressure than May for whom it is a much more salient issue
I cannot see how "parliament" can propose something to the EU without it being presented by the government, because the european council consists of 28 govenments.
May can resign and then a UK government with different personnell can take control, but as we have seen in the last month, what parliament wants puts pressure on the government, but cannot not compell it to do something it doesent want to.
This is a genuine question, as lots of people are suggesting it as a possibility but I cannot imagine how it occurs in practice
Every proposal has a majority against it. Every proposal has a vociferous group of MPs determined to frustrate it. A referendum has a majority against in Parliament and in the country. Not least, it is a recipe for much more squabbling, as it won't deliver a clear-cut result. I don't see it happening on a short timescale.
If Revoke or Remain were so popular, I'd expect to see it in the polling of the only party that wants to undo Brexit, the LibDems. That is the kind of thing politicians would notice, a huge surge in the parties supporting Remain or Revoke.
The EU have to take control. There are two options. WA or No Deal. Do what you want, but choose.
They are right to be concerned.
I bet they don't though lol
It is mandatory that we pass legislation in the next three weeks and in practice it will be less than that by the time journalists and mps realise how yesterday has changed so much.
Revoke is all that is left for remainers
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/mar/21/apocalypse-next-week-theresa-may-meaningful-vote?CMP=share_btn_tw
May then has three choices. She's spent three years refusing to shift her red lines,but she can pick one of the options with majority support and try to run with it. Her recent statements seem to indicate a possible willingness to do that, backing off from "as PM I will not...". She can resign. I don't think anything we've seen of her suggests she'll willingly give up. Or she can defy Parliament and say she'll let no deal happen.
In case 3, we then get an instant Labour VONC. Tory rebels then have to consider whether they will break party unity on that (=reselection death) or accept that May can ignore Parliament (=democracy death).
TM deal - amended TM deal - no deal - revoke
MV3, have no idea why it is at 1.4 now.
This price might have been correct with Macron's/Tusks original words but there is zip incentive for new Labour MPs to back it now (The 3 near me still will but noone else) and the DUP isn't on board. Add the 20 hardline ERGers in and it has v little chance.
Edit/ as Portillo says, mayhem breaks out in the Tory party, which presumably has a leadership contest thereafter, and there is a big question about viable government. Hence a possible GE or political realignment. But that's for after.
Nothing is impossible but in our HOC getting the enabling bill through all it stages and passing into law by the 12th April would require a single attitude of purpose by mps that is not there, and would be fought tooth and nail by ERG and others
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.130939030
The swine.
"Wee're out! Except we're not"
https://twitter.com/SurreyAmps/status/1100154193539682304
Once you are in possession of the seals of office you're the PM.
Not that I'd be annoyed to lose the bragging rights to longest winning tip. I wouldn't mind at all.
.....