The power of government to duck the hard choices facing the country has simply moved to MPs who are doing their best to duck the same hard choices. Bercow could force MPs back to reality but does he have the political capital to be able to do so, when so many are in denial?
Revocation is looking increasingly sensible.
The country already made the hard choice. So has the government to a degree... parliament is making the easy choice of ignoring it and hoping it will go away, like a smoker deciding not to give up after the doctor told him to... it will catch up with them in the end
The hard choice was made in 1975 which you choose to ignore.
There's no majority for a second referendum in parliament. That's why this is a "confirmatory vote" they are legislating for a yes/no question and it seems to have tricked second referendum types into believing that labour are actually in favour of one (which entirely what the proposal exists to do).
It's more Labour can kicking of the variety of "we oppose whatever the Tories are doing, but aren't commiting to anything ourselves". May isn't the only one can kicking throughout this process.
Israel, 9th April India, 11th April to 19th May Finland, 14th April Indonesia, 17th April Spain, 28th April South Africa, 8th May Australia, by 18th May (House and Senate) or 2nd November (House only) Belgium, 26th May Denmark, by 17th June Portugal, by 6th October Greece, by 20th October Canada, by 21st October Argentina, 27th October Ukraine, 27th October Poland, by November Sri Lanka, by 9th December Switzerland, (2019)
Israel, 9th April India, 11th April to 19th May Finland, 14th April Indonesia, 17th April Spain, 28th April South Africa, 8th May Australia, by 18th May (House and Senate) or 2nd November (House only) Belgium, 26th May Denmark, by 17th June Portugal, by 6th October Greece, by 20th October Canada, by 21st October Argentina, 27th October Ukraine, 27th October Poland, by November Sri Lanka, by 9th December Switzerland, (2019)
So the problem with this is: Say Parliament votes for SM+CU, then votes through the WA with a rider saying "we're totally doing SM+CU". Is TMay or any other Tory PM really going to go off and negotiate a deal that includes free movement? And once they do, how many of the people who are currently supporting it going to keep supporting it?
Is the plan to get the WA through then go to the country knowing this parliament can't bind the next one?
Ye, here's the crucial thing. Once we've left, rejoining becomes a hell of alot harder. A political aspiration to agree a SM and CU, well that isn't legally binding and could be overtaken by... events. Only the WA is binding !
The Independent's John Rentoul on twitter has been crunching the numbers. I think he's out on a few but not by a great deal. Rough figures don't make for happy reading:
WA defeated by 100-150 votes, in theory, but won't be voted on.
Of the motions and amendments likely to be called (and some not).
#CCU (Snell) defeated by 100 votes Kyle-Wilson defeated by 130 votes Boles Common Market 2.0 defeated by 190 votes Revoke defeated by about 460 votes No deal defeated by about 500 votes WA+SM (Eustice) defeated by about 550 votes Malthouse defeated by about 550 votes
Thought Parliament could sort it out. Now we here.
The power of government to duck the hard choices facing the country has simply moved to MPs who are doing their best to duck the same hard choices. Bercow could force MPs back to reality but does he have the political capital to be able to do so, when so many are in denial?
Revocation is looking increasingly sensible.
The country already made the hard choice. So has the government to a degree... parliament is making the easy choice of ignoring it and hoping it will go away, like a smoker deciding not to give up after the doctor told him to... it will catch up with them in the end
The hard choice was made in 1975 which you choose to ignore.
The main decision of the summit conference was that the member States of the Community affirmed their intention to transform the whole complex of their relations into a European Union by the end of the decade. The institutions of the Community are to report on the subject by the end of 1975. The enlarged Community reaffirmed its determination to progress towards economic and monetary union; and it was fully accepted that progress in economic co-operation must move in parallel with progress in monetary co-operation.
...which again opens the possibility of "no deal". Jeez, what a mess.
How?
What happens if the people say no?
Revoke
That's insane. There was a referendum. Yes, I know it was only advisory but it should at least be tried. You can't set up an implausible series of events then say "Naah, let's not bother". The public would go apeshit and they would be right to do so.
If the public go apeshit they will vote for the HoC approved deal rather than Remain won't they!
Where is remain an option, it's a yes/no approval ballot. The no option brings the process back to this step.
Have you seen the wording of the ballot already?
It's a "confirmatory" referendum. It has to be a Yes/No question.
The closest I can think of is the Greek referendum on the austerity deal. That was a stupid idea as well.
Worth noting that ignoring the referendum has done Tsipras no harm.
That seems a very high estimate for single market and customs union. I feel like if there was enough backing for that softest of soft brexits things would have played out differently before now.
I would be very happy with that outcome and have been a supporter of it since the vote. It respects the result and strikes a compromise based on the fact that half the country want to Remain. Let’s do it.
May as well make our own predictions. Entirely without any methodology:
Single Market Deal: Lose by 20 Free Trade Agreement: Lose by 40 2nd Ref: Lose by 30 Customs Union Deal: Lose by 50 May's Deal: Lose by 160 (yes, more than MV2, I think even fewer have reason to back it now that the door is opened to other options) No Deal: Lose by 480 Revoke A50: Lose by 485
The Independent's John Rentoul on twitter has been crunching the numbers. I think he's out on a few but not by a great deal. Rough figures don't make for happy reading:
WA defeated by 100-150 votes, in theory, but won't be voted on.
Of the amendments likely to be called (and some not).
#CCU (Snell) defeated by 100 votes Kyle-Wilson defeated by 130 votes Boles Common Market 2.0 defeated by 190 votes Revoke defeated by about 460 votes No deal defeated by about 500 votes WA+SM (Eustice) defeated by about 550 votes Malthouse defeated by about 550 votes
Thought Parliament could sort it out. Now we here.
The Independent's John Rentoul on twitter has been crunching the numbers. I think he's out on a few but not by a great deal. Rough figures don't make for happy reading:
WA defeated by 100-150 votes, in theory, but won't be voted on.
Of the amendments likely to be called (and some not).
#CCU (Snell) defeated by 100 votes Kyle-Wilson defeated by 130 votes Boles Common Market 2.0 defeated by 190 votes Revoke defeated by about 460 votes No deal defeated by about 500 votes WA+SM (Eustice) defeated by about 550 votes Malthouse defeated by about 550 votes
Thought Parliament could sort it out. Now we here.
I think he’s got it totally wrong. Lots of MPs will vote for all the soft Brexit options. They won’t all be defeated by 100 votes.
So the problem with this is: Say Parliament votes for SM+CU, then votes through the WA with a rider saying "we're totally doing SM+CU". Is TMay or any other Tory PM really going to go off and negotiate a deal that includes free movement? And once they do, how many of the people who are currently supporting it going to keep supporting it?
Is the plan to get the WA through then go to the country knowing this parliament can't bind the next one?
Ye, here's the crucial thing. Once we've left, rejoining becomes a hell of alot harder. A political aspiration to agree a SM and CU, well that isn't legally binding and could be overtaken by... events. Only the WA is binding !
Exactly, the Letwinners can only guide this government not a subsequent one. Get out and run on whatever future arrangement you like and negotiate it if you win.
That seems a very high estimate for single market and customs union. I feel like if there was enough backing for that softest of soft brexits things would have played out differently before now.
I would be very happy with that outcome and have been a supporter of it since the vote. It respects the result and strikes a compromise based on the fact that half the country want to Remain. Let’s do it.
I'm sure I recall SeanT saying the same thing in the aftermath of the referendum
It does have that logic though. Just under half wanted in, but just over half wanted out, so you get out, but not much of an out. Everyone is unhappy but never mind.
The Independent's John Rentoul on twitter has been crunching the numbers. I think he's out on a few but not by a great deal. Rough figures don't make for happy reading:
WA defeated by 100-150 votes, in theory, but won't be voted on.
Of the amendments likely to be called (and some not).
#CCU (Snell) defeated by 100 votes Kyle-Wilson defeated by 130 votes Boles Common Market 2.0 defeated by 190 votes Revoke defeated by about 460 votes No deal defeated by about 500 votes WA+SM (Eustice) defeated by about 550 votes Malthouse defeated by about 550 votes
Thought Parliament could sort it out. Now we here.
Less than 100 backing Malthouse seems low end.
Interesting we have a forecast for CM 2.0 to be overwhelmingly defeated by Rentoul yet the other forecast just posted is for it to be narrowly passed. That's a very wide divergence.
On the eve of GE 2015, a referendum being offered was about 4-5/1... winning said referendum was probably the same price, people holding out for a pure outcome need to get real & stop pushing their luck.
The Independent's John Rentoul on twitter has been crunching the numbers. I think he's out on a few but not by a great deal. Rough figures don't make for happy reading:
WA defeated by 100-150 votes, in theory, but won't be voted on.
Of the amendments likely to be called (and some not).
#CCU (Snell) defeated by 100 votes Kyle-Wilson defeated by 130 votes Boles Common Market 2.0 defeated by 190 votes Revoke defeated by about 460 votes No deal defeated by about 500 votes WA+SM (Eustice) defeated by about 550 votes Malthouse defeated by about 550 votes
Thought Parliament could sort it out. Now we here.
I think he’s got it totally wrong. Lots of MPs will vote for all the soft Brexit options. They won’t all be defeated by 100 votes.
I think so too. The original customs union amendment only lost by a handful when there was much less pressure.
The Independent's John Rentoul on twitter has been crunching the numbers. I think he's out on a few but not by a great deal. Rough figures don't make for happy reading:
WA defeated by 100-150 votes, in theory, but won't be voted on.
Of the amendments likely to be called (and some not).
#CCU (Snell) defeated by 100 votes Kyle-Wilson defeated by 130 votes Boles Common Market 2.0 defeated by 190 votes Revoke defeated by about 460 votes No deal defeated by about 500 votes WA+SM (Eustice) defeated by about 550 votes Malthouse defeated by about 550 votes
Thought Parliament could sort it out. Now we here.
The bottom for can be eliminated, then go for preference voting for the top three, plus May's Deal.
...which again opens the possibility of "no deal". Jeez, what a mess.
How?
What happens if the people say no?
Revoke
That's insane. There was a referendum. Yes, I know it was only advisory but it should at least be tried. You can't set up an implausible series of events then say "Naah, let's not bother". The public would go apeshit and they would be right to do so.
If the public go apeshit they will vote for the HoC approved deal rather than Remain won't they!
Where is remain an option, it's a yes/no approval ballot. The no option brings the process back to this step.
Have you seen the wording of the ballot already?
It's a "confirmatory" referendum. It has to be a Yes/No question.
The closest I can think of is the Greek referendum on the austerity deal. That was a stupid idea as well.
Worth noting that ignoring the referendum has done Tsipras no harm.
His party has trailed the opposition ever since.
He made a very smart call to have an early election not long after he capitulated.
...which again opens the possibility of "no deal". Jeez, what a mess.
How?
What happens if the people say no?
Revoke
That's insane. There was a referendum. Yes, I know it was only advisory but it should at least be tried. You can't set up an implausible series of events then say "Naah, let's not bother". The public would go apeshit and they would be right to do so.
If the public go apeshit they will vote for the HoC approved deal rather than Remain won't they!
Where is remain an option, it's a yes/no approval ballot. The no option brings the process back to this step.
Have you seen the wording of the ballot already?
It's a "confirmatory" referendum. It has to be a Yes/No question.
In case it is No, the EU will require us to undertake the elections for MEPs.
On the eve of GE 2015, a referendum being offered was about 4-5/1... winning said referendum was probably the same price, people holding out for a pure outcome need to get real & stop pushing their luck.
Where do you get that from? On the eve of GE 2015 a referendum being offered was Tory policy.
On the eve of GE 2015, a referendum being offered was about 4-5/1... winning said referendum was probably the same price, people holding out for a pure outcome need to get real & stop pushing their luck.
Too little too late. Even if every member of the ERG voted for May's deal (which they won't) it still won't pass without significant Labour and DUP support which isn't happening.
On the eve of GE 2015, a referendum being offered was about 4-5/1... winning said referendum was probably the same price, people holding out for a pure outcome need to get real & stop pushing their luck.
Where do you get that from? On the eve of GE 2015 a referendum being offered was Tory policy.
They were about 13/2 to win a majority, and I think they would have been odds on to wriggle out of it if the coalition had continued
Wow. Has Theresa really now got both Rees-Mogg and Boris on her mantelpiece? But how on earth do they square that with their previous assertions that No Deal would be just fine and dandy and Theresa's deal is worse than Remain?
On the eve of GE 2015, a referendum being offered was about 4-5/1... winning said referendum was probably the same price, people holding out for a pure outcome need to get real & stop pushing their luck.
Too little too late. Even if every member of the ERG voted for May's deal (which they won't) it still won't pass without significant Labour and DUP support which isn't happening.
If it gets 300+ Tory MPs enough opposition MPs will be bought. It would need an additional 5 Labour switchers and 10 abstainers to ensure it passed. Eaay enough. The tough part is getting the WA to 300+ Tory MPs.
On the eve of GE 2015, a referendum being offered was about 4-5/1... winning said referendum was probably the same price, people holding out for a pure outcome need to get real & stop pushing their luck.
Where do you get that from? On the eve of GE 2015 a referendum being offered was Tory policy.
They were about 13/2 to win a majority, and I think they would have been odds on to wriggle out of it if the coalition had continued
Cameron said he would not form any Coalition that didn't honour the pledge, that if he couldn't honour the pledge he would resign.
Wow. Has Theresa really now got both Rees-Mogg and Boris on her mantelpiece? But how on earth do they square that with there previous assertions that No Deal would be just fine and dandy and Theresa's deal is worse than Remain?
And if we have the humiliation of a 2nd referendum, Mays Deal vs Remain, clips of them slagging it off will be on loop
The power of government to duck the hard choices facing the country has simply moved to MPs who are doing their best to duck the same hard choices. Bercow could force MPs back to reality but does he have the political capital to be able to do so, when so many are in denial?
Revocation is looking increasingly sensible.
The country already made the hard choice. So has the government to a degree... parliament is making the easy choice of ignoring it and hoping it will go away, like a smoker deciding not to give up after the doctor told him to... it will catch up with them in the end
The hard choice was made in 1975 which you choose to ignore.
The main decision of the summit conference was that the member States of the Community affirmed their intention to transform the whole complex of their relations into a European Union by the end of the decade. The institutions of the Community are to report on the subject by the end of 1975. The enlarged Community reaffirmed its determination to progress towards economic and monetary union; and it was fully accepted that progress in economic co-operation must move in parallel with progress in monetary co-operation.
The power of government to duck the hard choices facing the country has simply moved to MPs who are doing their best to duck the same hard choices. Bercow could force MPs back to reality but does he have the political capital to be able to do so, when so many are in denial?
Revocation is looking increasingly sensible.
The country already made the hard choice. So has the government to a degree... parliament is making the easy choice of ignoring it and hoping it will go away, like a smoker deciding not to give up after the doctor told him to... it will catch up with them in the end
The hard choice was made in 1975 which you choose to ignore.
No one now under the age of 62 had any part in that choice.
On the eve of GE 2015, a referendum being offered was about 4-5/1... winning said referendum was probably the same price, people holding out for a pure outcome need to get real & stop pushing their luck.
Where do you get that from? On the eve of GE 2015 a referendum being offered was Tory policy.
They were about 13/2 to win a majority, and I think they would have been odds on to wriggle out of it if the coalition had continued
Cameron said he would not form any Coalition that didn't honour the pledge, that if he couldn't honour the pledge he would resign.
On the eve of GE 2015, a referendum being offered was about 4-5/1... winning said referendum was probably the same price, people holding out for a pure outcome need to get real & stop pushing their luck.
Too little too late. Even if every member of the ERG voted for May's deal (which they won't) it still won't pass without significant Labour and DUP support which isn't happening.
Ye the number of Labour votes May's deal can attract is limited as the lexit hardliners like Ronnie Campbell, Skinner and Hoey (Include Corbyn if you like ) will never support it; and the Gov't have managed to rub potential softer support like Nandy up the wrong way. Which leaves a very particular group of Brexity Labour MPs who aren't ultra Brexit but just Brexit enough. Flint, Mann, Barron and possibly Snell on a good day. Its a small bunch, the lot that block Brexit blocking stuff is bigger at around 8 consistent rebels.
Wow. Has Theresa really now got both Rees-Mogg and Boris on her mantelpiece? But how on earth do they square that with there previous assertions that No Deal would be just fine and dandy and Theresa's deal is worse than Remain?
If they follow through and do back it then they will presumably claim the situation has changed in that parliament is now set to reverse Brexit for real, or endorse something so soft it makes no difference, and that they don't believe no deal is achievable even though they think it would be fine.
Which wouldn't answer their comments or hints that the deal was worse than remain (I forget exactly what each has said on the matter) but would also rather suggest they have absolutely no ability to see more than one step ahead, since parliament taking us down this sort of route, which might lead to no brexit or much softer brexits, was very very obvious for some time.
The power of government to duck the hard choices facing the country has simply moved to MPs who are doing their best to duck the same hard choices. Bercow could force MPs back to reality but does he have the political capital to be able to do so, when so many are in denial?
Revocation is looking increasingly sensible.
The country already made the hard choice. So has the government to a degree... parliament is making the easy choice of ignoring it and hoping it will go away, like a smoker deciding not to give up after the doctor told him to... it will catch up with them in the end
The hard choice was made in 1975 which you choose to ignore.
The main decision of the summit conference was that the member States of the Community affirmed their intention to transform the whole complex of their relations into a European Union by the end of the decade. The institutions of the Community are to report on the subject by the end of 1975. The enlarged Community reaffirmed its determination to progress towards economic and monetary union; and it was fully accepted that progress in economic co-operation must move in parallel with progress in monetary co-operation.
Confirming that we didn’t join the EU in 1975.
Confirming that we knew it would become the EU before we joined.
On the eve of GE 2015, a referendum being offered was about 4-5/1... winning said referendum was probably the same price, people holding out for a pure outcome need to get real & stop pushing their luck.
Too little too late. Even if every member of the ERG voted for May's deal (which they won't) it still won't pass without significant Labour and DUP support which isn't happening.
But if May's deal came out top of the indicative votes, that might be enough. If I was the ERG, I would say to May that they would back her deal in the indicative votes, if she whipped for it, and dare the Tory Remainers/Soft Brexiters to trash the Tory party by breaking the whip.
May as well make our own predictions. Entirely without any methodology:
Single Market Deal: Lose by 20 Free Trade Agreement: Lose by 40 2nd Ref: Lose by 30 Customs Union Deal: Lose by 50 May's Deal: Lose by 160 (yes, more than MV2, I think even fewer have reason to back it now that the door is opened to other options) No Deal: Lose by 480 Revoke A50: Lose by 485
I'm pretty sure May's Deal will do better than that. Most Conservatives and independents who are willing to support soft Brexit will want to keep it as an option, as will some Conservatives who favour hard Brexit. The DUP are the only ones who would favour anything apart from her deal.
I think the margin of defeat for second ref will be much bigger, given the way that it's been drafted to put off soft Brexiteers.
On the eve of GE 2015, a referendum being offered was about 4-5/1... winning said referendum was probably the same price, people holding out for a pure outcome need to get real & stop pushing their luck.
Too little too late. Even if every member of the ERG voted for May's deal (which they won't) it still won't pass without significant Labour and DUP support which isn't happening.
Ye the number of Labour votes May's deal can attract is limited as the lexit hardliners like Ronnie Campbell, Skinner and Hoey (Include Corbyn if you like ) will never support it; and the Gov't have managed to rub potential softer support like Nandy up the wrong way. Which leaves a very particular group of Brexity Labour MPs who aren't ultra Brexit but just Brexit enough. Flint, Mann, Barron and possibly Snell on a good day. Its a small bunch, the lot that block Brexit blocking stuff is bigger at around 8 consistent rebels.
If it was close then I think the chancellor's warchest gets opened for their areas and they have a change of heart.
Wow. Has Theresa really now got both Rees-Mogg and Boris on her mantelpiece? But how on earth do they square that with their previous assertions that No Deal would be just fine and dandy and Theresa's deal is worse than Remain?
There is no practical route to No Deal with the HoC having taken control. That is how they can justify it. And it has been clear for a while that May's Shit Deal would not get renegotiated by May. And not by the HoC.
The ERG will fracture into oblivion. Send neither flowers nor donations.
On the eve of GE 2015, a referendum being offered was about 4-5/1... winning said referendum was probably the same price, people holding out for a pure outcome need to get real & stop pushing their luck.
Too little too late. Even if every member of the ERG voted for May's deal (which they won't) it still won't pass without significant Labour and DUP support which isn't happening.
But if May's deal came out top of the indicative votes, that might be enough. If I was the ERG, I would say to May that they would back her deal in the indicative votes, if she whipped for it, and dare the Tory Remainers/Soft Brexiters to trash the Tory party by breaking the whip.
That would have worked if they'd done it three months ago but it's too late to shock people at the disloyalty of breaking the whip now.
Wow. Has Theresa really now got both Rees-Mogg and Boris on her mantelpiece? But how on earth do they square that with their previous assertions that No Deal would be just fine and dandy and Theresa's deal is worse than Remain?
There is no practical route to No Deal with the HoC having taken control. That is how they can justify it. And it has been clear for a while that May's Shit Deal would not get renegotiated by May. And not by the HoC.
The ERG will fracture into oblivion. Send neither flowers nor donations.
However, even with most of the ERG on side, that's still not enough to get May's deal through the Commons.
On the eve of GE 2015, a referendum being offered was about 4-5/1... winning said referendum was probably the same price, people holding out for a pure outcome need to get real & stop pushing their luck.
Where do you get that from? On the eve of GE 2015 a referendum being offered was Tory policy.
They were about 13/2 to win a majority, and I think they would have been odds on to wriggle out of it if the coalition had continued
Cameron said he would not form any Coalition that didn't honour the pledge, that if he couldn't honour the pledge he would resign.
Yeah he said he wouldn’t resign if Leave won too
Which made sense as otherwise people would vote Leave to get rid of him when they should have been voting on the matter at hand.
He couldn't have survived going back on that pledge. It was a pledge given to quell his own MPs after nearly 100 voted for a referendum in 2012. If he backtracked he would have torn the party apart.
The power of government to duck the hard choices facing the country has simply moved to MPs who are doing their best to duck the same hard choices. Bercow could force MPs back to reality but does he have the political capital to be able to do so, when so many are in denial?
Revocation is looking increasingly sensible.
The country already made the hard choice. So has the government to a degree... parliament is making the easy choice of ignoring it and hoping it will go away, like a smoker deciding not to give up after the doctor told him to... it will catch up with them in the end
The hard choice was made in 1975 which you choose to ignore.
No one now under the age of 62 had any part in that choice.
Theresa May was only 18 years old at the time of that referendum.
Wow. Has Theresa really now got both Rees-Mogg and Boris on her mantelpiece? But how on earth do they square that with their previous assertions that No Deal would be just fine and dandy and Theresa's deal is worse than Remain?
There is no practical route to No Deal with the HoC having taken control. That is how they can justify it. And it has been clear for a while that May's Shit Deal would not get renegotiated by May. And not by the HoC.
The ERG will fracture into oblivion. Send neither flowers nor donations.
I am glad they are coming round to the deal but actually I still believe your basic comment about No Deal is wrong. The HoC cannot force May to revoke short of a VoNC. Now of course they may do that but 'having taken control' does not rule out their being No Deal as long as they refuse to endorse an alternative. The EU has confirmed it will only deal with May for as long as she is PM so until she decides to revoke instead of No Deal the risk remains.
On the eve of GE 2015, a referendum being offered was about 4-5/1... winning said referendum was probably the same price, people holding out for a pure outcome need to get real & stop pushing their luck.
Where do you get that from? On the eve of GE 2015 a referendum being offered was Tory policy.
They were about 13/2 to win a majority, and I think they would have been odds on to wriggle out of it if the coalition had continued
Cameron said he would not form any Coalition that didn't honour the pledge, that if he couldn't honour the pledge he would resign.
Yeah he said he wouldn’t resign if Leave won too
Which made sense as otherwise people would vote Leave to get rid of him when they should have been voting on the matter at hand.
He couldn't have survived going back on that pledge. It was a pledge given to quell his own MPs after nearly 100 voted for a referendum in 2012. If he backtracked he would have torn the party apart.
The Lib Dem’s flagship policy in 2010 was to scrap tuition fees. In order to satisfy their coalition partners they voted to treble them.
The power of government to duck the hard choices facing the country has simply moved to MPs who are doing their best to duck the same hard choices. Bercow could force MPs back to reality but does he have the political capital to be able to do so, when so many are in denial?
Revocation is looking increasingly sensible.
The country already made the hard choice. So has the government to a degree... parliament is making the easy choice of ignoring it and hoping it will go away, like a smoker deciding not to give up after the doctor told him to... it will catch up with them in the end
The hard choice was made in 1975 which you choose to ignore.
The main decision of the summit conference was that the member States of the Community affirmed their intention to transform the whole complex of their relations into a European Union by the end of the decade. The institutions of the Community are to report on the subject by the end of 1975. The enlarged Community reaffirmed its determination to progress towards economic and monetary union; and it was fully accepted that progress in economic co-operation must move in parallel with progress in monetary co-operation.
Confirming that we didn’t join the EU in 1975.
Confirming that we knew it would become the EU before we joined.
PS. 1975 was the referendum. We joined in 1973.
Thanks for the PS. Got that thanks. The original post raising the issue was the one saying that the hard decision was made in 1975. I infer the author meant that the referendum to stay in the EEC (no loss of sovereignty honest guv) after having been taken in without referendum in 1973 also counted as a referendum to join the EU. Debatable is putting it mildly.
Wow. Has Theresa really now got both Rees-Mogg and Boris on her mantelpiece? But how on earth do they square that with their previous assertions that No Deal would be just fine and dandy and Theresa's deal is worse than Remain?
There is no practical route to No Deal with the HoC having taken control. That is how they can justify it. And it has been clear for a while that May's Shit Deal would not get renegotiated by May. And not by the HoC.
The ERG will fracture into oblivion. Send neither flowers nor donations.
However, even with most of the ERG on side, that's still not enough to get May's deal through the Commons.
On the eve of GE 2015, a referendum being offered was about 4-5/1... winning said referendum was probably the same price, people holding out for a pure outcome need to get real & stop pushing their luck.
Where do you get that from? On the eve of GE 2015 a referendum being offered was Tory policy.
They were about 13/2 to win a majority, and I think they would have been odds on to wriggle out of it if the coalition had continued
Cameron said he would not form any Coalition that didn't honour the pledge, that if he couldn't honour the pledge he would resign.
Yeah he said he wouldn’t resign if Leave won too
Which made sense as otherwise people would vote Leave to get rid of him when they should have been voting on the matter at hand.
He couldn't have survived going back on that pledge. It was a pledge given to quell his own MPs after nearly 100 voted for a referendum in 2012. If he backtracked he would have torn the party apart.
The Lib Dem’s flagship policy in 2010 was to scrap tuition fees. In order to satisfy their coalition partners they voted to treble them.
And they were junior partners and it destroyed the party.
You think Cameron as senior partner in a coalition would trash his flagship policy that he needed to keep his own MPs on board?
Wow. Has Theresa really now got both Rees-Mogg and Boris on her mantelpiece? But how on earth do they square that with their previous assertions that No Deal would be just fine and dandy and Theresa's deal is worse than Remain?
There is no practical route to No Deal with the HoC having taken control. That is how they can justify it. And it has been clear for a while that May's Shit Deal would not get renegotiated by May. And not by the HoC.
The ERG will fracture into oblivion. Send neither flowers nor donations.
However, even with most of the ERG on side, that's still not enough to get May's deal through the Commons.
It might, if nothing else is favoured.
Get May's deal close then formally chop off the PD.
The power of government to duck the hard choices facing the country has simply moved to MPs who are doing their best to duck the same hard choices. Bercow could force MPs back to reality but does he have the political capital to be able to do so, when so many are in denial?
Revocation is looking increasingly sensible.
The country already made the hard choice. So has the government to a degree... parliament is making the easy choice of ignoring it and hoping it will go away, like a smoker deciding not to give up after the doctor told him to... it will catch up with them in the end
The hard choice was made in 1975 which you choose to ignore.
The main decision of the summit conference was that the member States of the Community affirmed their intention to transform the whole complex of their relations into a European Union by the end of the decade. The institutions of the Community are to report on the subject by the end of 1975. The enlarged Community reaffirmed its determination to progress towards economic and monetary union; and it was fully accepted that progress in economic co-operation must move in parallel with progress in monetary co-operation.
Confirming that we didn’t join the EU in 1975.
Confirming that we knew it would become the EU before we joined.
PS. 1975 was the referendum. We joined in 1973.
Thanks for the PS. Got that thanks. The original post raising the issue was the one saying that the hard decision was made in 1975. I infer the author meant that the referendum to stay in the EEC (no loss of sovereignty honest guv) after having been taken in without referendum in 1973 also counted as a referendum to join the EU. Debatable is putting it mildly.
On the eve of GE 2015, a referendum being offered was about 4-5/1... winning said referendum was probably the same price, people holding out for a pure outcome need to get real & stop pushing their luck.
Where do you get that from? On the eve of GE 2015 a referendum being offered was Tory policy.
They were about 13/2 to win a majority, and I think they would have been odds on to wriggle out of it if the coalition had continued
Cameron said he would not form any Coalition that didn't honour the pledge, that if he couldn't honour the pledge he would resign.
Yeah he said he wouldn’t resign if Leave won too
Which made sense as otherwise people would vote Leave to get rid of him when they should have been voting on the matter at hand.
He couldn't have survived going back on that pledge. It was a pledge given to quell his own MPs after nearly 100 voted for a referendum in 2012. If he backtracked he would have torn the party apart.
The Lib Dem’s flagship policy in 2010 was to scrap tuition fees. In order to satisfy their coalition partners they voted to treble them.
And they were junior partners and it destroyed the party.
You think Cameron as senior partner in a coalition would trash his flagship policy that he needed to keep his own MPs on board?
4-5/1 was too big, it was probably more like 9/4.
He could have kicked it into the long grass for sure. There was no need to rush. What price would we have been not to have left the EU by April 2019 in June 2016?
The power of government to duck the hard choices facing the country has simply moved to MPs who are doing their best to duck the same hard choices. Bercow could force MPs back to reality but does he have the political capital to be able to do so, when so many are in denial?
Revocation is looking increasingly sensible.
The country already made the hard choice. So has the government to a degree... parliament is making the easy choice of ignoring it and hoping it will go away, like a smoker deciding not to give up after the doctor told him to... it will catch up with them in the end
The hard choice was made in 1975 which you choose to ignore.
The main decision of the summit conference was that the member States of the Community affirmed their intention to transform the whole complex of their relations into a European Union by the end of the decade. The institutions of the Community are to report on the subject by the end of 1975. The enlarged Community reaffirmed its determination to progress towards economic and monetary union; and it was fully accepted that progress in economic co-operation must move in parallel with progress in monetary co-operation.
Confirming that we didn’t join the EU in 1975.
Confirming that we knew it would become the EU before we joined.
PS. 1975 was the referendum. We joined in 1973.
Thanks for the PS. Got that thanks. The original post raising the issue was the one saying that the hard decision was made in 1975. I infer the author meant that the referendum to stay in the EEC (no loss of sovereignty honest guv) after having been taken in without referendum in 1973 also counted as a referendum to join the EU. Debatable is putting it mildly.
Yes but a bit young, more engaged with it at the time of Maastricht tbh. IMHO there had to a referendum at that point and all of the issues since derive from the Europhiles being too scared to have one and make the honest case for their vision (wouldn’t have convinced me but who knows they might have convinced enough). But there it is.
On the eve of GE 2015, a referendum being offered was about 4-5/1... winning said referendum was probably the same price, people holding out for a pure outcome need to get real & stop pushing their luck.
Where do you get that from? On the eve of GE 2015 a referendum being offered was Tory policy.
They were about 13/2 to win a majority, and I think they would have been odds on to wriggle out of it if the coalition had continued
Cameron said he would not form any Coalition that didn't honour the pledge, that if he couldn't honour the pledge he would resign.
Yeah he said he wouldn’t resign if Leave won too
Which made sense as otherwise people would vote Leave to get rid of him when they should have been voting on the matter at hand.
He couldn't have survived going back on that pledge. It was a pledge given to quell his own MPs after nearly 100 voted for a referendum in 2012. If he backtracked he would have torn the party apart.
The Lib Dem’s flagship policy in 2010 was to scrap tuition fees. In order to satisfy their coalition partners they voted to treble them.
On the eve of GE 2015, a referendum being offered was about 4-5/1... winning said referendum was probably the same price, people holding out for a pure outcome need to get real & stop pushing their luck.
Where do you get that from? On the eve of GE 2015 a referendum being offered was Tory policy.
They were about 13/2 to win a majority, and I think they would have been odds on to wriggle out of it if the coalition had continued
Cameron said he would not form any Coalition that didn't honour the pledge, that if he couldn't honour the pledge he would resign.
Yeah he said he wouldn’t resign if Leave won too
Which made sense as otherwise people would vote Leave to get rid of him when they should have been voting on the matter at hand.
He couldn't have survived going back on that pledge. It was a pledge given to quell his own MPs after nearly 100 voted for a referendum in 2012. If he backtracked he would have torn the party apart.
The Lib Dem’s flagship policy in 2010 was to scrap tuition fees. In order to satisfy their coalition partners they voted to treble them.
And that worked out... well... for them?
It worked out badly. As will the Tories failure to make good on their promise to honour the Brexit vote
The power of government to duck the hard choices facing the country has simply moved to MPs who are doing their best to duck the same hard choices. Bercow could force MPs back to reality but does he have the political capital to be able to do so, when so many are in denial?
Revocation is looking increasingly sensible.
The country already made the hard choice. So has the government to a degree... parliament is making the easy choice of ignoring it and hoping it will go away, like a smoker deciding not to give up after the doctor told him to... it will catch up with them in the end
The hard choice was made in 1975 which you choose to ignore.
No one now under the age of 62 had any part in that choice.
Theresa May was only 18 years old at the time of that referendum.
I was 10 and I have had to suffer the consequences for almost my whole life.
On topic. I don't think Trumps insults make that much difference, but I too have written off Biden and Sanders as too old. Thats with 2 years before even taking office, and the Dems want two terms.
The power of government to duck the hard choices facing the country has simply moved to MPs who are doing their best to duck the same hard choices. Bercow could force MPs back to reality but does he have the political capital to be able to do so, when so many are in denial?
Revocation is looking increasingly sensible.
The country already made the hard choice. So has the government to a degree... parliament is making the easy choice of ignoring it and hoping it will go away, like a smoker deciding not to give up after the doctor told him to... it will catch up with them in the end
The hard choice was made in 1975 which you choose to ignore.
No one now under the age of 62 had any part in that choice.
Theresa May was only 18 years old at the time of that referendum.
I was 10 and I have had to suffer the consequences for almost my whole life.
The power of government to duck the hard choices facing the country has simply moved to MPs who are doing their best to duck the same hard choices. Bercow could force MPs back to reality but does he have the political capital to be able to do so, when so many are in denial?
Revocation is looking increasingly sensible.
The country already made the hard choice. So has the government to a degree... parliament is making the easy choice of ignoring it and hoping it will go away, like a smoker deciding not to give up after the doctor told him to... it will catch up with them in the end
The hard choice was made in 1975 which you choose to ignore.
No one now under the age of 62 had any part in that choice.
Theresa May was only 18 years old at the time of that referendum.
I was 10 and I have had to suffer the consequences for almost my whole life.
On the eve of GE 2015, a referendum being offered was about 4-5/1... winning said referendum was probably the same price, people holding out for a pure outcome need to get real & stop pushing their luck.
Where do you get that from? On the eve of GE 2015 a referendum being offered was Tory policy.
They were about 13/2 to win a majority, and I think they would have been odds on to wriggle out of it if the coalition had continued
Cameron said he would not form any Coalition that didn't honour the pledge, that if he couldn't honour the pledge he would resign.
Yeah he said he wouldn’t resign if Leave won too
Which made sense as otherwise people would vote Leave to get rid of him when they should have been voting on the matter at hand.
He couldn't have survived going back on that pledge. It was a pledge given to quell his own MPs after nearly 100 voted for a referendum in 2012. If he backtracked he would have torn the party apart.
The Lib Dem’s flagship policy in 2010 was to scrap tuition fees. In order to satisfy their coalition partners they voted to treble them.
And that worked out... well... for them?
It worked out badly. As will the Tories failure to make good on their promise to honour the Brexit vote
Oh, sorry, I apparently misinterpreted your comment as claiming that Cameron could have got out of his manifesto commitments.
On the eve of GE 2015, a referendum being offered was about 4-5/1... winning said referendum was probably the same price, people holding out for a pure outcome need to get real & stop pushing their luck.
Where do you get that from? On the eve of GE 2015 a referendum being offered was Tory policy.
They were about 13/2 to win a majority, and I think they would have been odds on to wriggle out of it if the coalition had continued
Cameron said he would not form any Coalition that didn't honour the pledge, that if he couldn't honour the pledge he would resign.
Yeah he said he wouldn’t resign if Leave won too
Which made sense as otherwise people would vote Leave to get rid of him when they should have been voting on the matter at hand.
He couldn't have survived going back on that pledge. It was a pledge given to quell his own MPs after nearly 100 voted for a referendum in 2012. If he backtracked he would have torn the party apart.
The Lib Dem’s flagship policy in 2010 was to scrap tuition fees. In order to satisfy their coalition partners they voted to treble them.
And that worked out... well... for them?
It worked out badly. As will the Tories failure to make good on their promise to honour the Brexit vote
Oh, sorry, I apparently misinterpreted your comment as claiming that Cameron could have got out of his manifesto commitments.
I think there was wiggle room for him if he hadn’t won a majority. Look at the situation we are in now... a referendum was held and we were told it would be the final decision. Two parties promising to implement the vote win 84% of votes at the following GE, and 3 years later we haven’t left, and look every day more like never leaving. Cameron also promised a referendum on the Lisbon treaty
On the eve of GE 2015, a referendum being offered was about 4-5/1... winning said referendum was probably the same price, people holding out for a pure outcome need to get real & stop pushing their luck.
Where do you get that from? On the eve of GE 2015 a referendum being offered was Tory policy.
They were about 13/2 to win a majority, and I think they would have been odds on to wriggle out of it if the coalition had continued
Cameron said he would not form any Coalition that didn't honour the pledge, that if he couldn't honour the pledge he would resign.
Yeah he said he wouldn’t resign if Leave won too
Which made sense as otherwise people would vote Leave to get rid of him when they should have been voting on the matter at hand.
He couldn't have survived going back on that pledge. It was a pledge given to quell his own MPs after nearly 100 voted for a referendum in 2012. If he backtracked he would have torn the party apart.
The Lib Dem’s flagship policy in 2010 was to scrap tuition fees. In order to satisfy their coalition partners they voted to treble them.
And that worked out... well... for them?
It worked out badly. As will the Tories failure to make good on their promise to honour the Brexit vote
Oh, sorry, I apparently misinterpreted your comment as claiming that Cameron could have got out of his manifesto commitments.
I think there was wiggle room for him if he hadn’t won a majority
Probably. Although, Clegg was advocating an in/out referendum as early as 2008, but mysteriously lost the appetite for it once in Government.
"The BBC is so preoccupied with diversity and gender balance that it has become less representative of the country it serves, according to Michael Buerk.
The former foreign correspondent and news anchor said the corporation spends too much time worrying about paying women as “fabulously” as men.
It is dominated by a metropolitan middle class, he claimed, adding that the imminent departure of John Humphrys from Radio 4’s Today programme is a loss because he is that rare thing: a BBC presenter from a working class background with no university education."
People keep using this statistic that "almost every MP got elected on a manifesto promising to vote for Brexit", and that they're breaking that promise ... but in fact, almost every MP HAS voted for one form of Brexit.
Virtually every Tory MP has voted for either a May Deal Brexit or No Deal Brexit
Virtually every Labour MP has voted for a Corbyn Customs Union Brexit
Hell, even the Lib Dems and SNP voted for a Single Market Brexit in June 2017, despite being elected on manifestos opposed to any form of Brexit.
On the eve of GE 2015, a referendum being offered was about 4-5/1... winning said referendum was probably the same price, people holding out for a pure outcome need to get real & stop pushing their luck.
Where do you get that from? On the eve of GE 2015 a referendum being offered was Tory policy.
They were about 13/2 to win a majority, and I think they would have been odds on to wriggle out of it if the coalition had continued
Cameron said he would not form any Coalition that didn't honour the pledge, that if he couldn't honour the pledge he would resign.
Yeah he said he wouldn’t resign if Leave won too
Which made sense as otherwise people would vote Leave to get rid of him when they should have been voting on the matter at hand.
He couldn't have survived going back on that pledge. It was a pledge given to quell his own MPs after nearly 100 voted for a referendum in 2012. If he backtracked he would have torn the party apart.
The Lib Dem’s flagship policy in 2010 was to scrap tuition fees. In order to satisfy their coalition partners they voted to treble them.
And that worked out... well... for them?
It worked out badly. As will the Tories failure to make good on their promise to honour the Brexit vote
Oh, sorry, I apparently misinterpreted your comment as claiming that Cameron could have got out of his manifesto commitments.
I think there was wiggle room for him if he hadn’t won a majority.
There's no wriggle room in what he says here: "I will not lead a government that does not deliver that pledge."
This was meant to have been a week of national jubilation. It was meant to be the week when church bells were rung, coins struck, stamps issued and bonfires lit to send beacons of freedom from hilltop to hilltop. This was the Friday when Charles Moore’s retainers were meant to be weaving through the moonlit lanes of Sussex, half blind with scrumpy, singing Brexit shanties at the tops of their voices and beating the hedgerows with staves.
FWIW I heard from a well-placed Democrat - someone who is really well plugged in at a high level, to the extent of being on the Hillary campaign's conference calls every morning up to the last election - that Biden had personally told my contact that he wasn't going to run. Now, to be fair, this conversation took place some time ago, and perhaps Biden has changed his mind. Make of it what you will; personally I don't think it rules out a Biden bid, but does he really have the energy and hunger to go for it as whole-heartedly as he would need to?
This was meant to have been a week of national jubilation. It was meant to be the week when church bells were rung, coins struck, stamps issued and bonfires lit to send beacons of freedom from hilltop to hilltop. This was the Friday when Charles Moore’s retainers were meant to be weaving through the moonlit lanes of Sussex, half blind with scrumpy, singing Brexit shanties at the tops of their voices and beating the hedgerows with staves.
The House of Commons is a, & is in, complete disgrace.
The grandest establishment of the land is acting like a celebrity getting off a ban for speeding on a technicality by hiring an expensive lawyer, filibustering the voters in order to deny them what was promised to be ‘your decision’ in a ‘once in a generation vote’. Absolutely disgusting.
Where in the legislation setting up the referendum did it say it would be acted upon?
It is a convention in this country, and most successful societies, families or firms, that promises are kept. The government promised the result of the referendum would be enacted.
The number of Liberal Democrat MPs returned in the 2015 election shows what happens when politicians adopt a carefree attitude to solemn commitments. The public don’t like it.
But the Government which made that promise - David Cameron's - no longer exists!
This was meant to have been a week of national jubilation. It was meant to be the week when church bells were rung, coins struck, stamps issued and bonfires lit to send beacons of freedom from hilltop to hilltop. This was the Friday when Charles Moore’s retainers were meant to be weaving through the moonlit lanes of Sussex, half blind with scrumpy, singing Brexit shanties at the tops of their voices and beating the hedgerows with staves.
On the eve of GE 2015, a referendum being offered was about 4-5/1... winning said referendum was probably the same price, people holding out for a pure outcome need to get real & stop pushing their luck.
Where do you get that from? On the eve of GE 2015 a referendum being offered was Tory policy.
They were about 13/2 to win a majority, and I think they would have been odds on to wriggle out of it if the coalition had continued
Cameron said he would not form any Coalition that didn't honour the pledge, that if he couldn't honour the pledge he would resign.
Yeah he said he wouldn’t resign if Leave won too
Which made sense as otherwise people would vote Leave to get rid of him when they should have been voting on the matter at hand.
He couldn't have survived going back on that pledge. It was a pledge given to quell his own MPs after nearly 100 voted for a referendum in 2012. If he backtracked he would have torn the party apart.
The Lib Dem’s flagship policy in 2010 was to scrap tuition fees. In order to satisfy their coalition partners they voted to treble them.
And that worked out... well... for them?
It worked out badly. As will the Tories failure to make good on their promise to honour the Brexit vote
Oh, sorry, I apparently misinterpreted your comment as claiming that Cameron could have got out of his manifesto commitments.
I think there was wiggle room for him if he hadn’t won a majority.
There's no wriggle room in what he says here: "I will not lead a government that does not deliver that pledge."
The House of Commons is a, & is in, complete disgrace.
The grandest establishment of the land is acting like a celebrity getting off a ban for speeding on a technicality by hiring an expensive lawyer, filibustering the voters in order to deny them what was promised to be ‘your decision’ in a ‘once in a generation vote’. Absolutely disgusting.
Where in the legislation setting up the referendum did it say it would be acted upon?
It is a convention in this country, and most successful societies, families or firms, that promises are kept. The government promised the result of the referendum would be enacted.
The number of Liberal Democrat MPs returned in the 2015 election shows what happens when politicians adopt a carefree attitude to solemn commitments. The public don’t like it.
But the Government which made that promise - David Cameron's - no longer exists!
I don't think so. While the likes of Adonis/Grayling and many ERGers certainly qualify, Boris is something else. He's just a slimy BS merchant. I doubt he cares much either way.
On the eve of GE 2015, a referendum being offered was about 4-5/1... winning said referendum was probably the same price, people holding out for a pure outcome need to get real & stop pushing their luck.
Where do you get that from? On the eve of GE 2015 a referendum being offered was Tory policy.
They were about 13/2 to win a majority, and I think they would have been odds on to wriggle out of it if the coalition had continued
Cameron said he would not form any Coalition that didn't honour the pledge, that if he couldn't honour the pledge he would resign.
Yeah he said he wouldn’t resign if Leave won too
Which made sense as otherwise people would vote Leave to get rid of him when they should have been voting on the matter at hand.
He couldn't have survived going back on that pledge. It was a pledge given to quell his own MPs after nearly 100 voted for a referendum in 2012. If he backtracked he would have torn the party apart.
The Lib Dem’s flagship policy in 2010 was to scrap tuition fees. In order to satisfy their coalition partners they voted to treble them.
And that worked out... well... for them?
It worked out badly. As will the Tories failure to make good on their promise to honour the Brexit vote
Oh, sorry, I apparently misinterpreted your comment as claiming that Cameron could have got out of his manifesto commitments.
I think there was wiggle room for him if he hadn’t won a majority.
There's no wriggle room in what he says here: "I will not lead a government that does not deliver that pledge."
That's very different. Of course he has to answer yes, but it was clear that having fronted a referendum campaign and lost, he couldn't carry on. If he'd tried, the ERG would have forced him out. It was naive of Carswell to even ask the question.
FWIW I heard from a well-placed Democrat - someone who is really well plugged in at a high level, to the extent of being on the Hillary campaign's conference calls every morning up to the last election - that Biden had personally told my contact that he wasn't going to run. Now, to be fair, this conversation took place some time ago, and perhaps Biden has changed his mind. Make of it what you will; personally I don't think it rules out a Biden bid, but does he really have the energy and hunger to go for it as whole-heartedly as he would need to?
Thanks for sharing that. He definitely has form for kind-of sounding like he might be in, leaving things quite late, then announcing that he's not running.
This was meant to have been a week of national jubilation. It was meant to be the week when church bells were rung, coins struck, stamps issued and bonfires lit to send beacons of freedom from hilltop to hilltop. This was the Friday when Charles Moore’s retainers were meant to be weaving through the moonlit lanes of Sussex, half blind with scrumpy, singing Brexit shanties at the tops of their voices and beating the hedgerows with staves.
Blimey, another one that has been driven mad.
"Whom the Gods would destroy they first make mad".
This was meant to have been a week of national jubilation. It was meant to be the week when church bells were rung, coins struck, stamps issued and bonfires lit to send beacons of freedom from hilltop to hilltop. This was the Friday when Charles Moore’s retainers were meant to be weaving through the moonlit lanes of Sussex, half blind with scrumpy, singing Brexit shanties at the tops of their voices and beating the hedgerows with staves.
Speaking of which, is there anywhere I can buy remaindered celebratory brexit kitsch, friends might appreciate a "March 29th, 2019 Independence Day" mug or whatever.
On the eve of GE 2015, a referendum being offered was about 4-5/1... winning said referendum was probably the same price, people holding out for a pure outcome need to get real & stop pushing their luck.
Where do you get that from? On the eve of GE 2015 a referendum being offered was Tory policy.
They were about 13/2 to win a majority, and I think they would have been odds on to wriggle out of it if the coalition had continued
Cameron said he would not form any Coalition that didn't honour the pledge, that if he couldn't honour the pledge he would resign.
Yeah he said he wouldn’t resign if Leave won too
Which made sense as otherwise people would vote Leave to get rid of him when they should have been voting on the matter at hand.
He couldn't have survived going back on that pledge. It was a pledge given to quell his own MPs after nearly 100 voted for a referendum in 2012. If he backtracked he would have torn the party apart.
The Lib Dem’s flagship policy in 2010 was to scrap tuition fees. In order to satisfy their coalition partners they voted to treble them.
And that worked out... well... for them?
It worked out badly. As will the Tories failure to make good on their promise to honour the Brexit vote
Oh, sorry, I apparently misinterpreted your comment as claiming that Cameron could have got out of his manifesto commitments.
I think there was wiggle room for him if he hadn’t won a majority. Look at the situation we are in now... a referendum was held and we were told it would be the final decision. Two parties promising to implement the vote win 84% of votes at the following GE, and 3 years later we haven’t left, and look every day more like never leaving. Cameron also promised a referendum on the Lisbon treaty
Not this Lisbon nonsense again. He promised a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty before it was ratified for the forthcoming election [that never was]. Brown cancelled the election and then ratified Lisbon and Cameron immediately said that since Lisbon was now ratified he could no longer hold a referendum on it. Before the 2010 election.
This was meant to have been a week of national jubilation. It was meant to be the week when church bells were rung, coins struck, stamps issued and bonfires lit to send beacons of freedom from hilltop to hilltop. This was the Friday when Charles Moore’s retainers were meant to be weaving through the moonlit lanes of Sussex, half blind with scrumpy, singing Brexit shanties at the tops of their voices and beating the hedgerows with staves.
Speaking of which, is there anywhere I can buy remaindered celebratory brexit kitsch, friends might appreciate a "March 29th, 2019 Independence Day" mug or whatever.
This was meant to have been a week of national jubilation. It was meant to be the week when church bells were rung, coins struck, stamps issued and bonfires lit to send beacons of freedom from hilltop to hilltop. This was the Friday when Charles Moore’s retainers were meant to be weaving through the moonlit lanes of Sussex, half blind with scrumpy, singing Brexit shanties at the tops of their voices and beating the hedgerows with staves.
Speaking of which, is there anywhere I can buy remaindered celebratory brexit kitsch, friends might appreciate a "March 29th, 2019 Independence Day" mug or whatever.
The House of Commons is a, & is in, complete disgrace.
The grandest establishment of the land is acting like a celebrity getting off a ban for speeding on a technicality by hiring an expensive lawyer, filibustering the voters in order to deny them what was promised to be ‘your decision’ in a ‘once in a generation vote’. Absolutely disgusting.
Where in the legislation setting up the referendum did it say it would be acted upon?
It is a convention in this country, and most successful societies, families or firms, that promises are kept. The government promised the result of the referendum would be enacted.
The number of Liberal Democrat MPs returned in the 2015 election shows what happens when politicians adopt a carefree attitude to solemn commitments. The public don’t like it.
But the Government which made that promise - David Cameron's - no longer exists!
HMG carries on whoever leads it.
Indeed so - but no Government is bound by its predecessors!
Comments
And Good night again
WA defeated by 100-150 votes, in theory, but won't be voted on.
Of the motions and amendments likely to be called (and some not).
#CCU (Snell) defeated by 100 votes
Kyle-Wilson defeated by 130 votes
Boles Common Market 2.0 defeated by 190 votes
Revoke defeated by about 460 votes
No deal defeated by about 500 votes
WA+SM (Eustice) defeated by about 550 votes
Malthouse defeated by about 550 votes
Thought Parliament could sort it out. Now we here.
https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/commons/1972/oct/23/european-communities-summit-conference-1
The main decision of the summit conference was that the member States of the Community affirmed their intention to transform the whole complex of their relations into a European Union by the end of the decade. The institutions of the Community are to report on the subject by the end of 1975. The enlarged Community reaffirmed its determination to progress towards economic and monetary union; and it was fully accepted that progress in economic co-operation must move in parallel with progress in monetary co-operation.
Single Market Deal: Lose by 20
Free Trade Agreement: Lose by 40
2nd Ref: Lose by 30
Customs Union Deal: Lose by 50
May's Deal: Lose by 160 (yes, more than MV2, I think even fewer have reason to back it now that the door is opened to other options)
No Deal: Lose by 480
Revoke A50: Lose by 485
It does have that logic though. Just under half wanted in, but just over half wanted out, so you get out, but not much of an out. Everyone is unhappy but never mind.
Interesting we have a forecast for CM 2.0 to be overwhelmingly defeated by Rentoul yet the other forecast just posted is for it to be narrowly passed. That's a very wide divergence.
On the eve of GE 2015, a referendum being offered was about 4-5/1... winning said referendum was probably the same price, people holding out for a pure outcome need to get real & stop pushing their luck.
Which wouldn't answer their comments or hints that the deal was worse than remain (I forget exactly what each has said on the matter) but would also rather suggest they have absolutely no ability to see more than one step ahead, since parliament taking us down this sort of route, which might lead to no brexit or much softer brexits, was very very obvious for some time.
PS. 1975 was the referendum. We joined in 1973.
If I was the ERG, I would say to May that they would back her deal in the indicative votes, if she whipped for it, and dare the Tory Remainers/Soft Brexiters to trash the Tory party by breaking the whip.
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1110668007842430976
I think the margin of defeat for second ref will be much bigger, given the way that it's been drafted to put off soft Brexiteers.
The ERG will fracture into oblivion. Send neither flowers nor donations.
He couldn't have survived going back on that pledge. It was a pledge given to quell his own MPs after nearly 100 voted for a referendum in 2012. If he backtracked he would have torn the party apart.
Why don' t they all join PB and have it out on here. We'd welcome them!
Is Peston "is hearing"
Newton Dunn "posts" a Whatsapp screenshot...
You think Cameron as senior partner in a coalition would trash his flagship policy that he needed to keep his own MPs on board?
But yes, so many of these things get leaked, it must be hard to have some actual serious discussions in Westminster.
https://twitter.com/Jim_Cornelius/status/1104305338424143872
He could have kicked it into the long grass for sure. There was no need to rush. What price would we have been not to have left the EU by April 2019 in June 2016?
These desperate bloody chancers.
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1110568125819441152
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1110680083688312833
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/03/26/bbc-has-become-spends-much-time-worrying-gender-race-diversity/
"The BBC is so preoccupied with diversity and gender balance that it has become less representative of the country it serves, according to Michael Buerk.
The former foreign correspondent and news anchor said the corporation spends too much time worrying about paying women as “fabulously” as men.
It is dominated by a metropolitan middle class, he claimed, adding that the imminent departure of John Humphrys from Radio 4’s Today programme is a loss because he is that rare thing: a BBC presenter from a working class background with no university education."
Virtually every Tory MP has voted for either a May Deal Brexit or No Deal Brexit
Virtually every Labour MP has voted for a Corbyn Customs Union Brexit
Hell, even the Lib Dems and SNP voted for a Single Market Brexit in June 2017, despite being elected on manifestos opposed to any form of Brexit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wo9D2H3bi4U
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/03/26/peoples-day-jubilation-has-hijacked-spineless-pirates/
This was meant to have been a week of national jubilation. It was meant to be the week when church bells were rung, coins struck, stamps issued and bonfires lit to send beacons of freedom from hilltop to hilltop. This was the Friday when Charles Moore’s retainers were meant to be weaving through the moonlit lanes of Sussex, half blind with scrumpy, singing Brexit shanties at the tops of their voices and beating the hedgerows with staves.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-36038059/eu-referendum-carswell-asks-cameron-about-uk-brexit
The only good thing about the deal going through is it gives those lucky enough 18 months to escape the right wing takeover of the UK !
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/04/article-50-bill-autographed-by-pm-to-be-auctioned-at-tory-dinner