There were clearly some things wrong with the procedure tonight. For a start when the poisoned dwarf said "unlock" the doors were actually unlocked. Secondly, the place was not on fire.
So Commons votes down everything on first round but May Deal + permanent Customs Union closest and loses by just 8
Also revoke Article 50 gets more votes than No Deal
"Deal + CU" and "Deal or Remain decided by referendum" look like the two potentially viable options.
Indeed. The indicative vote round one has done its job. Usual overreaction bullshit on PB.
From someone who obsessively spouts pure unmitigated hatred about Laura K whenever she is mentioned no matter how trivially I don't think you are in any position to get on a high horse about people responding with instant, emotive reactions to something actually important.
Well, Brexit has been rather taxing on all of us - I'd hope I don't get on the high horse myself too often, as I'm not liable to be comfortable up there!
Lock the fuckers onto the chamber, basic food and water only, no toilet breaks, no medication or alcohol until they make a decision-any decision. Once they decide, nuke London. It's the only way to be sure.
So. May's Deal still not in order to be voted on again, and would be defeated again. And all of the alternatives - most of which were a problem for the EU - have been rejected most of them substantially.
So, it remains Revoke or No Deal. May announcing that she's off- does that increase or decrease the prospects of May revoking in the final hour before we crash out?
Er, both your remainders were rejected substantially too.
Only option is now a referendum. GE allows Corbyn into power. Calamity.
May's Deal versus Remain. Then an end, Please.
You think that would end things ?
You're not that naive.
I think it would end this first phase of utterly tedious obsession. If the Deal wins, Remainers will finally have to shut up, for a while; if Remain wins, then the opposite, of course.
The blame for this ridiculous situation lies with whoever decided the HofC got a vote on the PMs deal
Wasn't that Grieve? (But I bet Letwins prints are on it too)
Not sure, but whoever it was should hang their head in shame
On the contrary, I think MPs are doing a grand job of representing the opinion of the country.
And Grieve is a legal genius.
Their job is not only to represent us. And Grieve's fanatacism is helping us how exactly? ANother example of people thinking he's great because they like his aims.
So Commons votes down everything on first round but May Deal + permanent Customs Union closest and loses by just 8
Also revoke Article 50 gets more votes than No Deal
"Deal + CU" and "Deal or Remain decided by referendum" look like the two potentially viable options.
Indeed. The indicative vote round one has done its job. Usual overreaction bullshit on PB.
From someone who obsessively spouts pure unmitigated hatred about Laura K whenever she is mentioned no matter how trivially I don't think you are in any position to get on a high horse about people responding with instant, emotive reactions to something actually important.
Pure unmitigated hatred? What on Earth are you talking about? Can you point me to a single post which indicates this? I think she is a poor journalist, and have said why I think that and given examples on several occasions. I have no opinion on her as a person. I’ve been in her company once or twice, she seems perfectly affable.
Norway and variations thereof look to be dead. So are revoke and no deal. The Malthouse unicorn has been shot between the eyes, and nobody wants a “Corbyn Brexit”, whatever the fuck that is.
And a GE solves nothing and is not wanted.
It really is either May’s Deal or May’s Deal with a Customs Union - and perhaps a confirmatory vote into the bargain. The only question is how we get there.
Lock the fuckers onto the chamber, basic food and water only, no toilet breaks, no medication or alcohol until they make a decision-any decision. Once they decide, nuke London. It's the only way to be sure.
You don’t need to, May needs to whip her deal with with a confirmation vote or custom union amendment.
Just a thought...if on Monday one option just creeps over the line, given these are only indicative and they failed tonight and ministers are abstaining, could a pm simply say still not clear, I will ignore it.
Lock the fuckers onto the chamber, basic food and water only, no toilet breaks, no medication or alcohol until they make a decision-any decision. Once they decide, nuke London. It's the only way to be sure.
You know if we did that in reverse order a whole series of problems would disappear.
Only option is now a referendum. GE allows Corbyn into power. Calamity.
May's Deal versus Remain. Then an end, Please.
You think that would end things ?
You're not that naive.
I think it would end this first phase of utterly tedious obsession. If the Deal wins, Remainers will finally have to shut up, for a while; if Remain wins, then the opposite, of course.
Yes, that's the reason I've come round to it.
Another referendum might mean that, whoever's on the losing side this time, they might finally give up, and then we can all move on with our lives.
That’s more informative than I expected. Note how close Beckett was. It looks like when other options are struck out it will be the last standing.
EDIT Clarke is even closer. Those are the two serious contenders now.
Yes, I'm very surprised by how close the second referendum idea came. A lot less Labour MPs opposed than expected, presumably.
It's not a second referendum. It's a confirmatory referendum on the Deal. Remain wouldn't be on the ballot paper.
More to the point, it didn't specify what would be on the ballot paper. I guess it would have got fewer votes if it had.
They don't get to specify what goes on the ballot paper, the electoral commission does that based on the enabling act. This having the wording of "confirmatory" leads to a yes/no answer. The point of this isn't to have a second referendum, it's to fool gullible idiots into believing Labour are in favour of a second referendum.
Norway and variations thereof look to be dead. So are revoke and no deal. The Malthouse unicorn has been shot between the eyes, and nobody wants a “Corbyn Brexit”, whatever the fuck that is.
And a GE solves nothing and is not wanted.
It really is either May’s Deal or May’s Deal with a Customs Union - and perhaps a confirmatory vote into the bargain. The only question is how we get there.
Over Bercow's dead body. (not literally of course).
How many names were on Carswell's motion of no confidence on Michael Martin? Given his outburst to McLoughlin tonight I think there would be triple figures for one on Bercow. He wouldn't do the decent thing and go like MM, though, he'd call a division.
Cummings condemns hardline Brexiters in the European Research Group as “delusional” and “useful idiots”. He says: Those of you in the narcissist-delusional subset of the ERG who have spent the last three years scrambling for the 810 Today slot while spouting gibberish about trade and the law across SW1 — i.e exactly the contemptible behaviour that led to your enforced marginalisation during the referendum and your attempt to destroy Vote Leave — you are also in the pirate category. You were useful idiots for Remain during the campaign and with every piece of bullshit from Bill Cash et al you have helped only Remain for three years. Remember how you WELCOMED the backstop as a ‘triumph’ in December 2017 when it was obvious to everybody who knew what was going on — NOT the Cabinet obviously — that this effectively ended the ‘negotiations’? Remember how Bernard Jenkin wrote on ConHome that he didn’t have to ‘ruin his weekend’ reading the document to know it was another success for the natural party of government — bringing to mind very clearly how during the referendum so many of you guys were too busy shooting or skiing or chasing girls to do any actual work. You should be treated like a metastasising tumour and excised from the UK body politic.” Cummings has been contemptuous of backbench Tory Brexiters in the Commons for years. During the EU referendum campaign he used to refer to them as the “flying monkeys”.
Cummings and Seant are one and the same person? Yes. For me the flying monkeys reference seals it, 1 part insult to one part what does he mean to one part page 43 of the joy of sex. They are both fluent in box office gonzo, but don’t really understand the point of politics. For example the point of Bozzy Bear’s Brexit politics in moving into number 10, not securing theleave voters voted for or standing by principles such as the union.
It is difficult to be sure, but one assumes an MV3 would have attracted votes in the 260s.
On those grounds, can we just restrict the vote to May’s Deal v May’s Deal + Customs Union, and then have a further vote pls on whether or not to add a confirmatory referendum?
can we not have a referendum on whether to have a referendum?
So Commons votes down everything on first round but May Deal + permanent Customs Union closest and loses by just 8
Also revoke Article 50 gets more votes than No Deal
"Deal + CU" and "Deal or Remain decided by referendum" look like the two potentially viable options.
Yes, both more popular than the government's shit deal.
Barely, given the number who have since switched to it since MV2 and those who have already proven willing to vote for it.
But none of the government were allowed to vote for any of the options today, I think.
Which is why I said barely - they might be more popular if that had happened, but not by a great deal I think.
And strictly speaking all of them were allowed to vote for any of the options - many people have resigned in order to do what they want.
I think either a soft Brexit deal or WA + referendum can pass, while May's deal can't. Or we can have a GE, and whoever wins that can implement what is in their manifesto. We just need to go down one of those routes now, and end the posturing and the Tory psychodrama.
Norway and variations thereof look to be dead. So are revoke and no deal. The Malthouse unicorn has been shot between the eyes, and nobody wants a “Corbyn Brexit”, whatever the fuck that is.
And a GE solves nothing and is not wanted.
It really is either May’s Deal or May’s Deal with a Customs Union - and perhaps a confirmatory vote into the bargain. The only question is how we get there.
I don't understand why this isn't "clearly" the result of this vote, but all the talking heads seem to be talking before doing any kind of basic analysis. There's no way anything else could get remotely close to commanding a majority, and the Clarke option was perilously close to being passed.
Norway and variations thereof look to be dead. So are revoke and no deal. The Malthouse unicorn has been shot between the eyes, and nobody wants a “Corbyn Brexit”, whatever the fuck that is.
And a GE solves nothing and is not wanted.
It really is either May’s Deal or May’s Deal with a Customs Union - and perhaps a confirmatory vote into the bargain. The only question is how we get there.
No one expected a result this time round. I’m surprised how close we came to one. The winnowing process continues and looks set to produce - finally - a realistic outcome.
Just a thought...if on Monday one option just creeps over the line, given these are only indicative and they failed tonight and ministers are abstaining, could a pm simply say still not clear, I will ignore it.
Yes. Especially if it means a re-negotiation.
After all we wouldn't change the course of the country on a non-binding vote that is only narrowly won would we?
So Commons votes down everything on first round but May Deal + permanent Customs Union closest and loses by just 8
Also revoke Article 50 gets more votes than No Deal
"Deal + CU" and "Deal or Remain decided by referendum" look like the two potentially viable options.
Indeed. The indicative vote round one has done its job. Usual overreaction bullshit on PB.
From someone who obsessively spouts pure unmitigated hatred about Laura K whenever she is mentioned no matter how trivially I don't think you are in any position to get on a high horse about people responding with instant, emotive reactions to something actually important.
Pure unmitigated hatred? What on Earth are you talking about? Can you point me to a single post which indicates this? I think she is a poor journalist, and have said why I think that and given examples on several occasions. I have no opinion on her as a person. I’ve been in her company once or twice, she seems perfectly affable.
I can point to every post you make on her - you are obsessed and mention your contempt for her as a journalist every time someone else brings her up, or you bring her up yourself apropos of nothing if no one else does, it's astounding and really quite strange - the equivalent would be, IDK, someone bringing up hatred of Guido Fawkes every other post.
Quibble with the terminology I used all you want, which yes was intentionally hyperbolic, you are demonstrably obsessed with the woman in a very negative way and you make me laugh out loud in trying to deny it. It would not be so bad but you then have the gall to get huffy about people being repetitive and obsessive on other matters, or going over the top.
We all get over the top about things sometimes, we're political wonks for crying out loud.
Norway and variations thereof look to be dead. So are revoke and no deal. The Malthouse unicorn has been shot between the eyes, and nobody wants a “Corbyn Brexit”, whatever the fuck that is.
And a GE solves nothing and is not wanted.
It really is either May’s Deal or May’s Deal with a Customs Union - and perhaps a confirmatory vote into the bargain. The only question is how we get there.
Arlene Foster, the leader of the DUP, says that her party did want to get a deal.
"But we feel, very fundamentally, that the backstop in that withdrawal agreement makes it impossible for us to sign up to the withdrawal agreement," she said.
"And you know what, I regret that because we wanted to get a deal, a deal that worked for the whole of the Union
What a sanctimonious pile of drivel.
Nonsense. The DUP have been utterly consistent on the backstop from the very start of the negotiations, and if May had listened to them earlier instead of folding at the first opportunity we wouldn't be in the mess we are now.
That’s more informative than I expected. Note how close Beckett was. It looks like when other options are struck out it will be the last standing.
EDIT Clarke is even closer. Those are the two serious contenders now.
Yes, I'm very surprised by how close the second referendum idea came. A lot less Labour MPs opposed than expected, presumably.
It's not a second referendum. It's a confirmatory referendum on the Deal. Remain wouldn't be on the ballot paper.
Of course Remain would be on the ballot paper. The only viable referendum choice - one that is workable, and which the EU might be prepared to delay Brexit for - is Deal vs Remain.
The thing is, the barriers to the Referendum are still formidable. It effectively requires MPs to vote by a majority for three things, all of which they have previously rejected: a public vote, and the possibility of Brexit being cancelled as a result, and the possibility of the Deal being implemented as a result.
And the clock is still ticking, and Leave is still the law, and No Deal is still the default form of Leave.
Norway and variations thereof look to be dead. So are revoke and no deal. The Malthouse unicorn has been shot between the eyes, and nobody wants a “Corbyn Brexit”, whatever the fuck that is.
And a GE solves nothing and is not wanted.
It really is either May’s Deal or May’s Deal with a Customs Union - and perhaps a confirmatory vote into the bargain. The only question is how we get there.
I don't understand why this isn't "clearly" the result of this vote, but all the talking heads seem to be talking before doing any kind of basic analysis. There's no way anything else could get remotely close to commanding a majority, and the Clarke option was perilously close to being passed.
I wouldn't rule out the most popular option still failing to get a majority in a future vote.
Only option is now a referendum. GE allows Corbyn into power. Calamity.
May's Deal versus Remain. Then an end, Please.
You think that would end things ?
You're not that naive.
I think it would end this first phase of utterly tedious obsession. If the Deal wins, Remainers will finally have to shut up, for a while; if Remain wins, then the opposite, of course.
Neither will shut up.
And if Remain won the Conservatives would implode and you really would get your Corbyn government then.
What has he done wrong exactly? The IV has gone exactly as expected - it’s an exercise in finding out what Parliament dislikes the least ffs.
Edit: Grieve saying exactly this on ITN.
Rubbish, no option got a majority vote and the same options get presented again in round 2. Its not like the 65 idiots who voted for Malthouse suddenly have 65 more votes for the other four options, they already voted for those as well.
Norway and variations thereof look to be dead. So are revoke and no deal. The Malthouse unicorn has been shot between the eyes, and nobody wants a “Corbyn Brexit”, whatever the fuck that is.
And a GE solves nothing and is not wanted.
It really is either May’s Deal or May’s Deal with a Customs Union - and perhaps a confirmatory vote into the bargain. The only question is how we get there.
No one expected a result this time round. I’m surprised how close we came to one. The winnowing process continues and looks set to produce - finally - a realistic outcome.
Ken Clarke’s customs union + WA seemed to have the broadest range of rebel Tory support, with 33 Tory votes in addition to over 200 Labour ones.
Feels like where it might go to me.
No way, its just not viable.
Lets say it goes through with 33 Tories. Then May resigns and a leadership election begins.
There are 314 Tories. Its unlikely that one, let alone both of the final two candidates will be from the 33. Meaning we likely get a new PM on a party mandate to reverse the CU pledge.
Which is why anything non-legally binding is meaningless and without re-negotiating the WA [which the EU can't do in time even if they wanted to] there is nothing to bind the next PM.
Cummings condemns hardline Brexiters in the European Research Group as “delusional” and “useful idiots”. He says: Those of you in the narcissist-delusional subset of the ERG who have spent the last three years scrambling for the 810 Today slot while spouting gibberish about trade and the law across SW1 — i.e exactly the contemptible behaviour that led to your enforced marginalisation during the referendum and your attempt to destroy Vote Leave — you are also in the pirate category. You were useful idiots for Remain during the campaign and with every piece of bullshit from Bill Cash et al you have helped only Remain for three years. Remember how you WELCOMED the backstop as a ‘triumph’ in December 2017 when it was obvious to everybody who knew what was going on — NOT the Cabinet obviously — that this effectively ended the ‘negotiations’? Remember how Bernard Jenkin wrote on ConHome that he didn’t have to ‘ruin his weekend’ reading the document to know it was another success for the natural party of government — bringing to mind very clearly how during the referendum so many of you guys were too busy shooting or skiing or chasing girls to do any actual work. You should be treated like a metastasising tumour and excised from the UK body politic.” Cummings has been contemptuous of backbench Tory Brexiters in the Commons for years. During the EU referendum campaign he used to refer to them as the “flying monkeys”.
Cummings and Seant are one and the same person? Yes. For me the flying monkeys reference seals it, 1 part insult to one part what does he mean to one part page 43 of the joy of sex. They are both fluent in box office gonzo, but don’t really understand the point of politics. For example the point of Bozzy Bear’s Brexit politics in moving into number 10, not securing theleave voters voted for or standing by principles such as the union.
Arlene Foster, the leader of the DUP, says that her party did want to get a deal.
"But we feel, very fundamentally, that the backstop in that withdrawal agreement makes it impossible for us to sign up to the withdrawal agreement," she said.
"And you know what, I regret that because we wanted to get a deal, a deal that worked for the whole of the Union
What a sanctimonious pile of drivel.
Nonsense. The DUP have been utterly consistent on the backstop from the very start of the negotiations, and if May had listened to them earlier instead of folding at the first opportunity we wouldn't be in the mess we are now.
Arlene Foster, the leader of the DUP, says that her party did want to get a deal.
"But we feel, very fundamentally, that the backstop in that withdrawal agreement makes it impossible for us to sign up to the withdrawal agreement," she said.
"And you know what, I regret that because we wanted to get a deal, a deal that worked for the whole of the Union
What a sanctimonious pile of drivel.
Nonsense. The DUP have been utterly consistent on the backstop from the very start of the negotiations, and if May had listened to them earlier instead of folding at the first opportunity we wouldn't be in the mess we are now.
Their position on the backstop was not the bit I took issue with. The drivel is the part that they claim they really wanted a deal, as if one was on offer without a backstop - that ship sailed a long time ago, and trying to act like they care about a deal that works for the whole Union is just code for a deal they want, which is not the same thing, and it is pure sanctimony to act regretful about the way things have gone down in recent months when it is what they want precisely because you are right they have been consistent and unchanging on the key point. I don't see why they are acting all sad about this, when it is exactly what they want.
So Commons votes down everything on first round but May Deal + permanent Customs Union closest and loses by just 8
Also revoke Article 50 gets more votes than No Deal
"Deal + CU" and "Deal or Remain decided by referendum" look like the two potentially viable options.
Indeed. The indicative vote round one has done its job. Usual overreaction bullshit on PB.
From someone who obsessively spouts pure unmitigated hatred about Laura K whenever she is mentioned no matter how trivially I don't think you are in any position to get on a high horse about people responding with instant, emotive reactions to something actually important.
Pure unmitigated hatred? What on Earth are you talking about? Can you point me to a single post which indicates this? I think she is a poor journalist, and have said why I think that and given examples on several occasions. I have no opinion on her as a person. I’ve been in her company once or twice, she seems perfectly affable.
I can point to every post you make on her - you are obsessed and mention your contempt for her as a journalist every time someone else brings her up, or you bring her up yourself apropos of nothing if no one else does, it's astounding and really quite strange - the equivalent would be, IDK, someone bringing up hatred of Guido Fawkes every other post.
Quibble with the terminology I used all you want, which yes was intentionally hyperbolic, you are demonstrably obsessed with the woman in a very negative way and you make me laugh out loud in trying to deny it. It would not be so bad but you then have the gall to get huffy about people being repetitive and obsessive on other matters, or going over the top.
We all get over the top about things sometimes, we're political wonks for crying out loud.
May wanted an easy early "win" so conceded the backstop so she could get on to negotiating the future. Fast forward 18 months we're still quarrelling over the backstop and not got very much on the future.
Had May responded with a Paisley-style "Never! Never! Never!" to the original backstop proposal we could have agreed something else before it was enshrined and too late.
Ken Clarke’s customs union + WA seemed to have the broadest range of rebel Tory support, with 33 Tory votes in addition to over 200 Labour ones.
Feels like where it might go to me.
No way, its just not viable.
Lets say it goes through with 33 Tories. Then May resigns and a leadership election begins.
There are 314 Tories. Its unlikely that one, let alone both of the final two candidates will be from the 33. Meaning we likely get a new PM on a party mandate to reverse the CU pledge.
Which is why anything non-legally binding is meaningless and without re-negotiating the WA [which the EU can't do in time even if they wanted to] there is nothing to bind the next PM.
I suspect the WA and it’s political declaration is only “non negotiable” in one direction.
That’s more informative than I expected. Note how close Beckett was. It looks like when other options are struck out it will be the last standing.
EDIT Clarke is even closer. Those are the two serious contenders now.
Yes, I'm very surprised by how close the second referendum idea came. A lot less Labour MPs opposed than expected, presumably.
It's not a second referendum. It's a confirmatory referendum on the Deal. Remain wouldn't be on the ballot paper.
Of course Remain would be on the ballot paper.
Endillion is a bit caught on it being defined as a confirmatory referendum, as if that will stop MPs putting whatever they like on the ballot, which I fear is not the case whatever they call it. They might as well call it a super duper xtreme non confirmation potential vote selector for all it matters, remain will get on there if MPs want it too.
The Clarke option will be defeated more heavily if the Cabinet/Tory Whips vote next time around.
Yes, I agree.
I can only see a GE or a new vote now.
Given that a GE will terrify the Tories, with the polls so volatile (and who would lead? And what would be their policy?) I think a 2nd referendum is now the most likely outcome.
Norway and variations thereof look to be dead. So are revoke and no deal. The Malthouse unicorn has been shot between the eyes, and nobody wants a “Corbyn Brexit”, whatever the fuck that is.
And a GE solves nothing and is not wanted.
It really is either May’s Deal or May’s Deal with a Customs Union - and perhaps a confirmatory vote into the bargain. The only question is how we get there.
No one expected a result this time round. I’m surprised how close we came to one. The winnowing process continues and looks set to produce - finally - a realistic outcome.
It's a shame the vote to go down this route did not pass the first time, would have saved us about a week of aggravation.
Cummings condemns hardline Brexiters in the European Research Group as “delusional” and “useful idiots”. He says: Those of you in the narcissist-delusional subset of the ERG who have spent the last three years scrambling for the 810 Today slot while spouting gibberish about trade and the law across SW1 — i.e exactly the contemptible behaviour that led to your enforced marginalisation during the referendum and your attempt to destroy Vote Leave — you are also in the pirate category. You were useful idiots for Remain during the campaign and with every piece of bullshit from Bill Cash et al you have helped only Remain for three years. Remember how you WELCOMED the backstop as a ‘triumph’ in December 2017 when it was obvious to everybody who knew what was going on — NOT the Cabinet obviously — that this effectively ended the ‘negotiations’? Remember how Bernard Jenkin wrote on ConHome that he didn’t have to ‘ruin his weekend’ reading the document to know it was another success for the natural party of government — bringing to mind very clearly how during the referendum so many of you guys were too busy shooting or skiing or chasing girls to do any actual work. You should be treated like a metastasising tumour and excised from the UK body politic.” Cummings has been contemptuous of backbench Tory Brexiters in the Commons for years. During the EU referendum campaign he used to refer to them as the “flying monkeys”.
Cummings and Seant are one and the same person? Yes. For me the flying monkeys reference seals it, 1 part insult to one part what does he mean to one part page 43 of the joy of sex. They are both fluent in box office gonzo, but don’t really understand the point of politics. For example the point of Bozzy Bear’s Brexit politics in moving into number 10, not securing theleave voters voted for or standing by principles such as the union.
I’m amused as one of them is Alan Duncan, who approached Vote Leave to be their leader before the start of their campaign.
Hunky Dunky!
Egoy Dunky.
Bit like Bercow he cares not what he leads as long as he ends up leading something.
From 2017, showing Sir Alan Duncan has excellent judgment.
For some political balance, someone who was seated next to Tory MP Sir Alan Duncan at a function recently asked the right honourable gentleman for his opinion on Theresa May, his party's beleaguered leader.
Hoping that he'd spill a little something juicy, they were disappointed to hear Duncan diplomatically explain the various issues he had with her style of leadership, her lack of core ideology and her unending dependence on bad advisors.
So they asked him for his opinion on Boris Johnson instead.
Ken Clarke’s customs union + WA seemed to have the broadest range of rebel Tory support, with 33 Tory votes in addition to over 200 Labour ones.
Feels like where it might go to me.
No way, its just not viable.
Lets say it goes through with 33 Tories. Then May resigns and a leadership election begins.
There are 314 Tories. Its unlikely that one, let alone both of the final two candidates will be from the 33. Meaning we likely get a new PM on a party mandate to reverse the CU pledge.
Which is why anything non-legally binding is meaningless and without re-negotiating the WA [which the EU can't do in time even if they wanted to] there is nothing to bind the next PM.
I suspect the WA and it’s political declaration is only “non negotiable” in one direction.
The political declaration is negotiable but is not legally binding so its moot.
I don't see a way to get a legally binding commitment to a customs union added into the WA in time. If its even possible to get a legally binding commitment to a customs union since the EU say they can't bind the future at this stage [except for some reason the backstop].
Ken Clarke’s customs union + WA seemed to have the broadest range of rebel Tory support, with 33 Tory votes in addition to over 200 Labour ones.
Feels like where it might go to me.
In yesterday morning's PB poll it was the second choice for Sean Fear and DavidL.
So sensible Tories can live with it.
I think we can live with it in the short term much as we'd live with the backstop, but it's not a viable long term solution for a country the size of the UK. We'd need an independent trade policy which reflects our strengths in services exports rather than EU strengths of goods and agricultural exports.
That’s more informative than I expected. Note how close Beckett was. It looks like when other options are struck out it will be the last standing.
EDIT Clarke is even closer. Those are the two serious contenders now.
Yes, I'm very surprised by how close the second referendum idea came. A lot less Labour MPs opposed than expected, presumably.
It's not a second referendum. It's a confirmatory referendum on the Deal. Remain wouldn't be on the ballot paper.
I believe Remain and Revoke Art 50 would be the default alternative based on Kyle's statements and he drafted Beckett
He won't get to implement it though. If the amendment says confirmatory then it has to be a Yes/No question.
A confirmatory vote is a yes no question. You have a proposition, and are asked whether you want it or not. If you vote yes, you get it, and if you vote no, you don't, and things stay as they are.
The Clarke option will be defeated more heavily if the Cabinet/Tory Whips vote next time around.
Yes, I agree.
I can only see a GE or a new vote now.
Given that a GE will terrify the Tories, with the polls so volatile (and who would lead? And what would be their policy?) I think a 2nd referendum is now the most likely outcome.
A GE doesn't address the issue, only a #peoplesvote does, and with a real chance of closure either way.
I’m amused as one of them is Alan Duncan, who approached Vote Leave to be their leader before the start of their campaign.
Hunky Dunky!
Egoy Dunky.
Bit like Bercow he cares not what he leads as long as he ends up leading something.
From 2017, showing Sir Alan Duncan has excellent judgment.
For some political balance, someone who was seated next to Tory MP Sir Alan Duncan at a function recently asked the right honourable gentleman for his opinion on Theresa May, his party's beleaguered leader.
Hoping that he'd spill a little something juicy, they were disappointed to hear Duncan diplomatically explain the various issues he had with her style of leadership, her lack of core ideology and her unending dependence on bad advisors.
So they asked him for his opinion on Boris Johnson instead.
Given that a GE will terrify the Tories, with the polls so volatile (and who would lead? And what would be their policy?) I think a 2nd referendum is now the most likely outcome.
And yet there are Tory MPs on record as wanting a GE - even if they should be terrified because of that lack of clarity of who would lead them and to do what, they are not acting rationally in that regard.
That’s more informative than I expected. Note how close Beckett was. It looks like when other options are struck out it will be the last standing.
EDIT Clarke is even closer. Those are the two serious contenders now.
Yes, I'm very surprised by how close the second referendum idea came. A lot less Labour MPs opposed than expected, presumably.
It's not a second referendum. It's a confirmatory referendum on the Deal. Remain wouldn't be on the ballot paper.
I believe Remain and Revoke Art 50 would be the default alternative based on Kyle's statements and he drafted Beckett
He won't get to implement it though. If the amendment says confirmatory then it has to be a Yes/No question.
A confirmatory vote is a yes no question. You have a proposition, and are asked whether you want it or not. If you vote yes, you get it, and if you vote no, you don't, and things stay as they are.
With how they are being the UK in Article 50 . . .
Garbage. MayDay did listen to the DUP, many times, she just knew that their demands were untenable. She could have gone on listening to these bigots until kingdom come, it would have made no difference.
Ken Clarke’s customs union + WA seemed to have the broadest range of rebel Tory support, with 33 Tory votes in addition to over 200 Labour ones.
Feels like where it might go to me.
In yesterday morning's PB poll it was the second choice for Sean Fear and DavidL.
So sensible Tories can live with it.
I think we can live with it in the short term much as we'd live with the backstop, but it's not a viable long term solution for a country the size of the UK. We'd need an independent trade policy which reflects our strengths in services exports rather than EU strengths of goods and agricultural exports.
Surely a Customs Union excludes services, so we could arrange whatever Deals on these we could fix.
Comments
You're not that naive.
Purist, posturing idiots.
Norway and variations thereof look to be dead. So are revoke and no deal. The Malthouse unicorn has been shot between the eyes, and nobody wants a “Corbyn Brexit”, whatever the fuck that is.
And a GE solves nothing and is not wanted.
It really is either May’s Deal or May’s Deal with a Customs Union - and perhaps a confirmatory vote into the bargain. The only question is how we get there.
I’m amused as one of them is Alan Duncan, who approached Vote Leave to be their leader before the start of their campaign.
Another referendum might mean that, whoever's on the losing side this time, they might finally give up, and then we can all move on with our lives.
It's sensible Sean_T tonight I see.
That after all is the way most MPs get elected.
What powers does that give the government?
Those of you in the narcissist-delusional subset of the ERG who have spent the last three years scrambling for the 810 Today slot while spouting gibberish about trade and the law across SW1 — i.e exactly the contemptible behaviour that led to your enforced marginalisation during the referendum and your attempt to destroy Vote Leave — you are also in the pirate category. You were useful idiots for Remain during the campaign and with every piece of bullshit from Bill Cash et al you have helped only Remain for three years. Remember how you WELCOMED the backstop as a ‘triumph’ in December 2017 when it was obvious to everybody who knew what was going on — NOT the Cabinet obviously — that this effectively ended the ‘negotiations’? Remember how Bernard Jenkin wrote on ConHome that he didn’t have to ‘ruin his weekend’ reading the document to know it was another success for the natural party of government — bringing to mind very clearly how during the referendum so many of you guys were too busy shooting or skiing or chasing girls to do any actual work. You should be treated like a metastasising tumour and excised from the UK body politic.”
Cummings has been contemptuous of backbench Tory Brexiters in the Commons for years. During the EU referendum campaign he used to refer to them as the “flying monkeys”.
Cummings and Seant are one and the same person? Yes. For me the flying monkeys reference seals it, 1 part insult to one part what does he mean to one part page 43 of the joy of sex. They are both fluent in box office gonzo, but don’t really understand the point of politics. For example the point of Bozzy Bear’s Brexit politics in moving into number 10, not securing theleave voters voted for or standing by principles such as the union.
What has he done wrong exactly? The IV has gone exactly as expected - it’s an exercise in finding out what Parliament dislikes the least ffs.
Edit: Grieve saying exactly this on ITN.
Feels like where it might go to me.
After all we wouldn't change the course of the country on a non-binding vote that is only narrowly won would we?
Quibble with the terminology I used all you want, which yes was intentionally hyperbolic, you are demonstrably obsessed with the woman in a very negative way and you make me laugh out loud in trying to deny it. It would not be so bad but you then have the gall to get huffy about people being repetitive and obsessive on other matters, or going over the top.
We all get over the top about things sometimes, we're political wonks for crying out loud.
The thing is, the barriers to the Referendum are still formidable. It effectively requires MPs to vote by a majority for three things, all of which they have previously rejected: a public vote, and the possibility of Brexit being cancelled as a result, and the possibility of the Deal being implemented as a result.
And the clock is still ticking, and Leave is still the law, and No Deal is still the default form of Leave.
And if Remain won the Conservatives would implode and you really would get your Corbyn government then.
Lets say it goes through with 33 Tories. Then May resigns and a leadership election begins.
There are 314 Tories. Its unlikely that one, let alone both of the final two candidates will be from the 33. Meaning we likely get a new PM on a party mandate to reverse the CU pledge.
Which is why anything non-legally binding is meaningless and without re-negotiating the WA [which the EU can't do in time even if they wanted to] there is nothing to bind the next PM.
I must flee.
Exeunt.
Bit like Bercow he cares not what he leads as long as he ends up leading something.
He can continue it because the number 76 stops outside the job centre.
Strip Steve Baker of citizenship and send him to Syria.
All commies deported to Venezuela.
Compulsory gay marriage for all DUP members. To Catholics.
Grayling/Adonis launched into the sun.
Had May responded with a Paisley-style "Never! Never! Never!" to the original backstop proposal we could have agreed something else before it was enshrined and too late.
The golden rule of politics in the past 30 years is that anything Letwin is involved with usually turns to ashes pretty quickly...
So sensible Tories can live with it.
I can only see a GE or a new vote now.
Given that a GE will terrify the Tories, with the polls so volatile (and who would lead? And what would be their policy?) I think a 2nd referendum is now the most likely outcome.
For some political balance, someone who was seated next to Tory MP Sir Alan Duncan at a function recently asked the right honourable gentleman for his opinion on Theresa May, his party's beleaguered leader.
Hoping that he'd spill a little something juicy, they were disappointed to hear Duncan diplomatically explain the various issues he had with her style of leadership, her lack of core ideology and her unending dependence on bad advisors.
So they asked him for his opinion on Boris Johnson instead.
Which was, simply: "Cu*t".
I don't see a way to get a legally binding commitment to a customs union added into the WA in time. If its even possible to get a legally binding commitment to a customs union since the EU say they can't bind the future at this stage [except for some reason the backstop].
Garbage. MayDay did listen to the DUP, many times, she just knew that their demands were untenable. She could have gone on listening to these bigots until kingdom come, it would have made no difference.