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.
Well yes. The government would also be much better placed if it had recognised reality and facilitated this instead of try to sabotage it. As can be seen, Theresa May’s deal doesn’t do too badly at all by comparison and would now have some renewed momentum at this stage if the Prime Minister had not already shot all her bolts.
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.
Yes, things stay as they are - n days from leaving with no deal. A no vote in a confirmatory referendum brings us back to this point.
The Tiggers all voted against Ken Clarke's customs union motion. Had they voted for, it would've been carried.
Purist, posturing idiots.
Regardless being in a CU out of the EU is nuts . Better to be in the single market and not the CU but of course the anti EU migrant mob couldn’t cope with that.
As a Remainer the best thing about the EU was freedom of movement , I could care less now what happens unless it involves FOM .
Given how confused even us wonks can get about what is the customs union or a customs union and what the single market is or Norway+ and Malthouse and Chequers and this and that, I don't think there would be as much difficulty in trying to sell customs union Brexit as Brexit enough for most people.
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.
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.
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.
If there were 8 different proposals on how to reform the NHS and parties said there would be a free vote and a Labour whip voted for the proposal "privatise it all" then I would expect that whip to be fired.
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.
Yes, things stay as they are - n days from leaving with no deal. A no vote in a confirmatory referendum brings us back to this point.
No, if people don't want the proposition then the process ends.
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.
I agree with that but what is clear is that we need to do a lot more homework and preparation before setting out into the bright new world and we haven't even started. My priority at this stage are to get out of the EU with the minimum of disruption to our trade. A Customs Union does that and really ought to get even Corbyn's support since that is supposed to be his position allowing the ERG, DUP and sundry other nutters to be outvoted if necessary.
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.
Which was, simply: "Cu*t".
It takes one to know one.
As someone who has met Duncan on a number of ocassions, I can confirm that he is an arrogant and obnoxious snob. Not as big a twat as Andrew Bridgen or as useless and invisible as Tredinnik amongst Leics MPs, but a git even though right on this issue.
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.
I agree with that but what is clear is that we need to do a lot more homework and preparation before setting out into the bright new world and we haven't even started. My priority at this stage are to get out of the EU with the minimum of disruption to our trade. A Customs Union does that and really ought to get even Corbyn's support since that is supposed to be his position allowing the ERG, DUP and sundry other nutters to be outvoted if necessary.
Yes, it's not where I would have started but it's certainly the best of a bad bunch.
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.
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.
not another one!!!
Yet, a GE avoids the explicit rejection of the people's original vote.
For that reason, and the historical precedent that a GE is the safety valve of our system, then we are well past the point that one needs to be called, no matter how inconvenient to all concerned.
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.
But that's the point, the question would be based on this wording of "confirmatory" and the enabling act would have to reflect that.
Labour is leading it's remain supporters up the garden path with this wording. Otherwise why not just come out and say "deal vs remain"?
They don't say it now as they want to win that without scaring the horses.
Confirmatory is just part of a motion now, there would need to be legislation going through all the motions and both houses of Parliament to enact it. No way it gets through that without Remain being an option.
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.
Things can and are changed over the long term.
But as we know we're in no shape to conduct an independent trade policy at present.
Have British politicians ever been held in such contempt as they are right now?
At least in the catastrophe of the Iraq War you could accept that Blair argued his case passionately and eloquently, and his opponents- like Robin Cook - were equally articulate and plausible (and, it turned out, much wiser than Blair).
There is no one on any side of this argument who is emerging with credit, certainly not the turncoat Tiggers, certainly not the ultra-Brexiteers, and certainly not Corbyn's Labour. Stupid mediocrity and desperate careerism prevail throughout.
I think May has emerged with credit. I certainly like her more now than I did 2 years ago
May has messed up completely. She has persuaded almost no-one that her deal has any merit, and has barely attempted to do so. It has been a complete failure of political tradecraft. Even if you take the view that the deal is the best possible, the Prime Minister has made no attempt to understand her opponents' objections, let alone to compromise or persuade. And the six million signatures remind us that Blair or Cameron, Brown and Major, right back through Wilson, Macmillan and Churchill, would have addressed us -- the nation -- directly. May has been inflexible, perhaps except for the truth, and her last throw of the dice is not to make a case for her deal but to offer her resignation. It is absurd and appalling.
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.
But that's the point, the question would be based on this wording of "confirmatory" and the enabling act would have to reflect that.
Labour is leading it's remain supporters up the garden path with this wording. Otherwise why not just come out and say "deal vs remain"?
Effectively that's what it is, if you read up on what Kyle and Wilson intended, as I did yesterday. But, as is Labour's way, they are talking in vaguer terms because of their Leave MPs.
Bill Cash having a totally normal one, praising Cromwell on BBC News.
Cromwell is good for a quote and a more nuanced figure in many ways that people give him credit for, but I don't know that he is perfect for people to call on in these situations. He spoke out against perpetual parliaments for a start.
I’m surprised 30-odd Tories voted for the CU. They didn’t need to.
May could end this all now if she swung behind a CU or behind a confirmatory ref.
Which is the least awful option from her perspective?
If she actually believes what she says then resigning. She has made clear she will not go back on the manifesto pledges. That means neither the Losers Revote nor a Customs Union is acceptable to her
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.
Yes, things stay as they are - n days from leaving with no deal. A no vote in a confirmatory referendum brings us back to this point.
No, if people don't want the proposition then the process ends.
Well, that means No Deal. Not Remain. The process didn't start with the first referendum.
Bill Cash having a totally normal one, praising Cromwell on BBC News.
Cromwell is good for a quote and a more nuanced figure in many ways that people give him credit for, but I don't know that he is perfect for people to call on in these situations. He spoke out against perpetual parliaments for a start.
Newsnight have just opened with a Cromwell quote. He's having quite the day.
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.
Things can and are changed over the long term.
But as we know we're in no shape to conduct an independent trade policy at present.
If there were 8 different proposals on how to reform the NHS and parties said there would be a free vote and a Labour whip voted for the proposal "privatise it all" then I would expect that whip to be fired.
Then you ought not to have offered a free vote then. It isn't a free vote if there are consequences of any kind.
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.
Things can and are changed over the long term.
But as we know we're in no shape to conduct an independent trade policy at present.
There aren't enough votes in parliament to put remain on the ballot paper. This odd yes/no question is the best they are going to be able to do and even it didn't get a majority (without the government whipping against). It's literally the labour leadership trying to keep remain voters on the same boat as leave voters.
Meanwhile, even with the deflating factors of the government having officially "rejected" it, and the guarantee that parliament will debate it, the petition is still creeping up - only 95,000 away from 6 milion, now .. :
Bill Cash having a totally normal one, praising Cromwell on BBC News.
Cromwell is good for a quote and a more nuanced figure in many ways that people give him credit for, but I don't know that he is perfect for people to call on in these situations. He spoke out against perpetual parliaments for a start.
Newsnight have just opened with a Cromwell quote. He's having quite the day.
Which quote? The dissolution of the Rump speech gets a lot of play (and isn't it that which made Hannan famous?)
So even for the biggest number of votes cast, there were still 60+ abstentions?
That’s the first lot I would throw out of parliament.
Looking at the vote analysis, I take that back. There seems to have been carefully judged abstentions - SNP and LibDems on the Clarke amendment for example.
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.
I agree with that but what is clear is that we need to do a lot more homework and preparation before setting out into the bright new world and we haven't even started. My priority at this stage are to get out of the EU with the minimum of disruption to our trade. A Customs Union does that and really ought to get even Corbyn's support since that is supposed to be his position allowing the ERG, DUP and sundry other nutters to be outvoted if necessary.
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.
Yes, things stay as they are - n days from leaving with no deal. A no vote in a confirmatory referendum brings us back to this point.
No, if people don't want the proposition then the process ends.
Well, that means No Deal. Not Remain. The process didn't start with the first referendum.
You know that isn't going to happen. No deal has been rejected comprehensively multiple times now. It is off the table; the PM said as much earlier in the week.
Given how confused even us wonks can get about what is the customs union or a customs union and what the single market is or Norway+ and Malthouse and Chequers and this and that, I don't think there would be as much difficulty in trying to sell customs union Brexit as Brexit enough for most people.
If May had said that we need a permanent customs union at the outset to resolve the Irish issue...it would be done and dusted.... She should have put her red line at the single market...
Seriously, who gives a fuck about doing trade deals with fuck knows where...for fuck knows what.... when we do all our trade in the EU?
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.
But that's the point, the question would be based on this wording of "confirmatory" and the enabling act would have to reflect that.
Labour is leading it's remain supporters up the garden path with this wording. Otherwise why not just come out and say "deal vs remain"?
Effectively that's what it is, if you read up on what Kyle and Wilson intended, as I did yesterday. But, as is Labour's way, they are talking in vaguer terms because of their Leave MPs.
As I said yesterday, it's surprising just how many second vote types are falling for this trick from the Labour leadership team. You're getting played by Corbyn, again.
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.
Yes, things stay as they are - n days from leaving with no deal. A no vote in a confirmatory referendum brings us back to this point.
No, if people don't want the proposition then the process ends.
Well, that means No Deal. Not Remain. The process didn't start with the first referendum.
You know that isn't going to happen. No deal has been rejected comprehensively multiple times now. It is off the table; the PM said as much earlier in the week.
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.
not another one!!!
Yet, a GE avoids the explicit rejection of the people's original vote.
For that reason, and the historical precedent that a GE is the safety valve of our system, then we are well past the point that one needs to be called, no matter how inconvenient to all concerned.
It's not just that it is inconvenient, it solves nothing because you cannot make the voters make it be about brexit. It will be about tory dementia tax vs free university fees from magic grandpa, or something. You will end up with a hung parliament and each side droning on about polls which purport to show that brexit was the 17th most salient issue in the average voter's mind. And that's if you can persuade the 2 main parties to ensure that there is clear blue water between their brexit policies in the first place.
Given how confused even us wonks can get about what is the customs union or a customs union and what the single market is or Norway+ and Malthouse and Chequers and this and that, I don't think there would be as much difficulty in trying to sell customs union Brexit as Brexit enough for most people.
If May had said that we need a permanent customs union at the outset to resolve the Irish issue...it would be done and dusted.... She should have put her red line at the single market...
Seriously, who gives a fuck about doing trade deals with fuck knows where...for fuck knows what.... when we do all our trade in the EU?
I’m surprised 30-odd Tories voted for the CU. They didn’t need to.
May could end this all now if she swung behind a CU or behind a confirmatory ref.
Which is the least awful option from her perspective?
She would have to change her opinion and show imagination. She hates a CU as it stops trade deals with Outer and Inner Moravia.
No problem there, none whatsoever.
The Telegraph said last weekend May could switch to her Deal and permanent Customs Union as a last resort and tonight's votes suggest that could scrape home
Have British politicians ever been held in such contempt as they are right now?
At least in the catastrophe of the Iraq War you could accept that Blair argued his case passionately and eloquently, and his opponents- like Robin Cook - were equally articulate and plausible (and, it turned out, much wiser than Blair).
There is no one on any side of this argument who is emerging with credit, certainly not the turncoat Tiggers, certainly not the ultra-Brexiteers, and certainly not Corbyn's Labour. Stupid mediocrity and desperate careerism prevail throughout.
I think May has emerged with credit. I certainly like her more now than I did 2 years ago
May has messed up completely. She has persuaded almost no-one that her deal has any merit, and has barely attempted to do so. It has been a complete failure of political tradecraft. Even if you take the view that the deal is the best possible, the Prime Minister has made no attempt to understand her opponents' objections, let alone to compromise or persuade. And the six million signatures remind us that Blair or Cameron, Brown and Major, right back through Wilson, Macmillan and Churchill, would have addressed us -- the nation -- directly. May has been inflexible, perhaps except for the truth, and her last throw of the dice is not to make a case for her deal but to offer her resignation. It is absurd and appalling.
She wanted to Remain but put together a deal that reflected the referendum result rather than indulge her own preference. The people she needed to convince refuse anything and everything that is presented to them as we’ve seen tonight.
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.
I agree with that but what is clear is that we need to do a lot more homework and preparation before setting out into the bright new world and we haven't even started. My priority at this stage are to get out of the EU with the minimum of disruption to our trade. A Customs Union does that and really ought to get even Corbyn's support since that is supposed to be his position allowing the ERG, DUP and sundry other nutters to be outvoted if necessary.
I agree a Customs Union bolted on probably gets a majority (even if not Corbyn, there's enough Labour MPs who oppose Remain for whom a CU would be enough), but it would probably come with a big condition - a long Article 50 extension, and proof that the government is negotiating a CU in good faith, before those Labour MPs agree to throw away their insurance policy by ratifying the withdrawal agreement. You can't expect Labour MPs to just have blind faith in whichever Tory leader replaces May.
Given how confused even us wonks can get about what is the customs union or a customs union and what the single market is or Norway+ and Malthouse and Chequers and this and that, I don't think there would be as much difficulty in trying to sell customs union Brexit as Brexit enough for most people.
If May had said that we need a permanent customs union at the outset to resolve the Irish issue...it would be done and dusted.... She should have put her red line at the single market...
Seriously, who gives a fuck about doing trade deals with fuck knows where...for fuck knows what.... when we do all our trade in the EU?
So even for the biggest number of votes cast, there were still 60+ abstentions?
That’s the first lot I would throw out of parliament.
The Cabinet and Whips abstained. So, in reality, the majority against CU and Second referendum is 47 greater in each case.
Not necessarily. Individually they would break between both sides.
The main object of Monday's process is to get people to choose between the available options (there may be a case for inserting May's deal back into the process). So there aren't any "no" votes in the same way as electing an MP has no "none" option. Then hope that whatever emerges can carry the house at the end.
Have British politicians ever been held in such contempt as they are right now?
At least in the catastrophe of the Iraq War you could accept that Blair argued his case passionately and eloquently, and his opponents- like Robin Cook - were equally articulate and plausible (and, it turned out, much wiser than Blair).
There is no one on any side of this argument who is emerging with credit, certainly not the turncoat Tiggers, certainly not the ultra-Brexiteers, and certainly not Corbyn's Labour. Stupid mediocrity and desperate careerism prevail throughout.
I think May has emerged with credit. I certainly like her more now than I did 2 years ago
May has messed up completely. She has persuaded almost no-one that her deal has any merit, and has barely attempted to do so. It has been a complete failure of political tradecraft. Even if you take the view that the deal is the best possible, the Prime Minister has made no attempt to understand her opponents' objections, let alone to compromise or persuade. And the six million signatures remind us that Blair or Cameron, Brown and Major, right back through Wilson, Macmillan and Churchill, would have addressed us -- the nation -- directly. May has been inflexible, perhaps except for the truth, and her last throw of the dice is not to make a case for her deal but to offer her resignation. It is absurd and appalling.
She wanted to Remain but put together a deal that reflected the referendum result rather than indulge her own preference. The people she needed to convince refuse anything and everything that is presented to them as we’ve seen tonight.
She only wanted to remain in economic terms, not in the immigration terms that are an article of EU faith. As a result, when she saw that the fatuous dream of combining the two was impossible, she pivoted towards a harder Brexit.
Have British politicians ever been held in such contempt as they are right now?
At least in the catastrophe of the Iraq War you could accept that Blair argued his case passionately and eloquently, and his opponents- like Robin Cook - were equally articulate and plausible (and, it turned out, much wiser than Blair).
There is no one on any side of this argument who is emerging with credit, certainly not the turncoat Tiggers, certainly not the ultra-Brexiteers, and certainly not Corbyn's Labour. Stupid mediocrity and desperate careerism prevail throughout.
I think May has emerged with credit. I certainly like her more now than I did 2 years ago
May has messed up completely. She has persuaded almost no-one that her deal has any merit, and has barely attempted to do so. It has been a complete failure of political tradecraft. Even if you take the view that the deal is the best possible, the Prime Minister has made no attempt to understand her opponents' objections, let alone to compromise or persuade. And the six million signatures remind us that Blair or Cameron, Brown and Major, right back through Wilson, Macmillan and Churchill, would have addressed us -- the nation -- directly. May has been inflexible, perhaps except for the truth, and her last throw of the dice is not to make a case for her deal but to offer her resignation. It is absurd and appalling.
She wanted to Remain but put together a deal that reflected the referendum result rather than indulge her own preference. The people she needed to convince refuse anything and everything that is presented to them as we’ve seen tonight.
She only wanted to remain in economic terms, not in the immigration terms that are an article of EU faith. As a result, when saw that the fatuous dream of combining the two was impossible, she pivoted towards a harder Brexit.
She was the Home Sec who oversaw the biggest net migration figures since records began
Have British politicians ever been held in such contempt as they are right now?
At least in the catastrophe of the Iraq War you could accept that Blair argued his case passionately and eloquently, and his opponents- like Robin Cook - were equally articulate and plausible (and, it turned out, much wiser than Blair).
There is no one on any side of this argument who is emerging with credit, certainly not the turncoat Tiggers, certainly not the ultra-Brexiteers, and certainly not Corbyn's Labour. Stupid mediocrity and desperate careerism prevail throughout.
I think May has emerged with credit. I certainly like her more now than I did 2 years ago
May has messed up completely. She has persuaded almost no-one that her deal has any merit, and has barely attempted to do so. It has been a complete failure of political tradecraft. Even if you take the view that the deal is the best possible, the Prime Minister has made no attempt to understand her opponents' objections, let alone to compromise or persuade. And the six million signatures remind us that Blair or Cameron, Brown and Major, right back through Wilson, Macmillan and Churchill, would have addressed us -- the nation -- directly. May has been inflexible, perhaps except for the truth, and her last throw of the dice is not to make a case for her deal but to offer her resignation. It is absurd and appalling.
She wanted to Remain but put together a deal that reflected the referendum result rather than indulge her own preference. The people she needed to convince refuse anything and everything that is presented to them as we’ve seen tonight.
The original sin was that she treated the referendum as though it was a general election ie winner takes all. Fine for a five year term but not for a generational vote. For that you need to include the losers.
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.
I agree with that but what is clear is that we need to do a lot more homework and preparation before setting out into the bright new world and we haven't even started. My priority at this stage are to get out of the EU with the minimum of disruption to our trade. A Customs Union does that and really ought to get even Corbyn's support since that is supposed to be his position allowing the ERG, DUP and sundry other nutters to be outvoted if necessary.
I agree a Customs Union bolted on probably gets a majority (even if not Corbyn, there's enough Labour MPs who oppose Remain for whom a CU would be enough), but it would probably come with a big condition - a long Article 50 extension, and proof that the government is negotiating a CU in good faith, before those Labour MPs agree to throw away their insurance policy by ratifying the withdrawal agreement. You can't expect Labour MPs to just have blind faith in whichever Tory leader replaces May.
The EU won't discuss the trade arrangements until we've left. The WA is the basis of any long term deal, it is the starting point of negotiating a trade deal with the EU without the cliff edge of no deal. Any move that we make needs to include ratification of the WA as step one.
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.
Yes, things stay as they are - n days from leaving with no deal. A no vote in a confirmatory referendum brings us back to this point.
No, if people don't want the proposition then the process ends.
Well, that means No Deal. Not Remain. The process didn't start with the first referendum.
You know that isn't going to happen. No deal has been rejected comprehensively multiple times now. It is off the table; the PM said as much earlier in the week.
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.
Yes, things stay as they are - n days from leaving with no deal. A no vote in a confirmatory referendum brings us back to this point.
No, if people don't want the proposition then the process ends.
Well, that means No Deal. Not Remain. The process didn't start with the first referendum.
You know that isn't going to happen. No deal has been rejected comprehensively multiple times now. It is off the table; the PM said as much earlier in the week.
So has everything else.
Point is, confirmatory referendum means Yes/No. As you said, No means we stay as we are. Which, right now, is leaving with No Deal, unless something happens to change it. If we get an extension to hold a confirmatory referendum, then the default is still Leave with No Deal, only later. So if we vote No, we are right back where we started.
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.
I agree with that but what is clear is that we need to do a lot more homework and preparation before setting out into the bright new world and we haven't even started. My priority at this stage are to get out of the EU with the minimum of disruption to our trade. A Customs Union does that and really ought to get even Corbyn's support since that is supposed to be his position allowing the ERG, DUP and sundry other nutters to be outvoted if necessary.
I agree a Customs Union bolted on probably gets a majority (even if not Corbyn, there's enough Labour MPs who oppose Remain for whom a CU would be enough), but it would probably come with a big condition - a long Article 50 extension, and proof that the government is negotiating a CU in good faith, before those Labour MPs agree to throw away their insurance policy by ratifying the withdrawal agreement. You can't expect Labour MPs to just have blind faith in whichever Tory leader replaces May.
I'd rather have Barron, Flint and Mann helping in the negotiation than half the cabinet.
Have British politicians ever been held in such contempt as they are right now?
At least in the catastrophe of the Iraq War you could accept that Blair argued his case passionately and eloquently, and his opponents- like Robin Cook - were equally articulate and plausible (and, it turned out, much wiser than Blair).
There is no one on any side of this argument who is emerging with credit, certainly not the turncoat Tiggers, certainly not the ultra-Brexiteers, and certainly not Corbyn's Labour. Stupid mediocrity and desperate careerism prevail throughout.
I think May has emerged with credit. I certainly like her more now than I did 2 years ago
May has messed up completely. She has persuaded almost no-one that her deal has any merit, and has barely attempted to do so. It has been a complete failure of political tradecraft. Even if you take the view that the deal is the best possible, the Prime Minister has made no attempt to understand her opponents' objections, let alone to compromise or persuade. And the six million signatures remind us that Blair or Cameron, Brown and Major, right back through Wilson, Macmillan and Churchill, would have addressed us -- the nation -- directly. May has been inflexible, perhaps except for the truth, and her last throw of the dice is not to make a case for her deal but to offer her resignation. It is absurd and appalling.
She wanted to Remain but put together a deal that reflected the referendum result rather than indulge her own preference. The people she needed to convince refuse anything and everything that is presented to them as we’ve seen tonight.
She only wanted to remain in economic terms, not in the immigration terms that are an article of EU faith. As a result, when saw that the fatuous dream of combining the two was impossible, she pivoted towards a harder Brexit.
She was the Home Sec who oversaw the biggest net migration figures since records began
...the politcal trauma of which, after being combined with her homespun village toryism, made her a permanent immigration obsessive.
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.
Yes, things stay as they are - n days from leaving with no deal. A no vote in a confirmatory referendum brings us back to this point.
No, if people don't want the proposition then the process ends.
Well, that means No Deal. Not Remain. The process didn't start with the first referendum.
You know that isn't going to happen. No deal has been rejected comprehensively multiple times now. It is off the table; the PM said as much earlier in the week.
Revoke just got rejected as well...
Because MPs will want us to do it for them.
Honestly it's like going round in circles. "This time Corbyn means it". You're getting played. Corbyn is a hard brexit no deal supporter. The wording is precisely the way it is because he's a hard brexit no deal supporter.
What are the odds on Grieve losing the vote of no confidence due at Friday's meeting of his constituency association? Are there moves against any of the others?
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.
Yes, things stay as they are - n days from leaving with no deal. A no vote in a confirmatory referendum brings us back to this point.
No, if people don't want the proposition then the process ends.
Well, that means No Deal. Not Remain. The process didn't start with the first referendum.
You know that isn't going to happen. No deal has been rejected comprehensively multiple times now. It is off the table; the PM said as much earlier in the week.
So has everything else.
Point is, confirmatory referendum means Yes/No. As you said, No means we stay as we are. Which, right now, is leaving with No Deal, unless something happens to change it. If we get an extension to hold a confirmatory referendum, then the default is still Leave with No Deal, only later. So if we vote No, we are right back where we started.
There is no point in having a referendum unless both sides of the question take us to a clear end state. And that end state is never going to be no deal. That's the simple political reality.
Clearly, if we sign up to the CU we are accepting no freedom to do our own trade deals. We are accepting being bound by the deals the EU negotiates. These have greatly favoured goods over services to our disadvantage even inside the EU so they are hardly likely to get better once we have left. We are bound by EU tariffs which give EU states a continued competitive advantage in our market. We are likely to be bound to comply with EU regulations in relation to goods etc because the overlap between the CU and the SM are considerable in that both are intended to facilitate free movement of goods. OTOH Disruption of trade and supply chain links with the EU largely disappear. The backstop largely ceases to be an issue. There is probably a majority for it in the Commons.
Like Max it is not what I would have chosen but given where we are it seems the best viable option (assuming May's deal isn't).
So, Labour's Brexit gets more votes if you call it Ken Clarke's Brexit. And both of those Brexits are the same as Theresa May's Brexit given that Theresa May's Brexit (which now comes without Theresa May) delivers a Customs Union via the Backstop, the Backstop that is in the Withdrawal Agreement, the same Withdrawal Agreement that is common to all Brexits and cannot be changed.
Given how confused even us wonks can get about what is the customs union or a customs union and what the single market is or Norway+ and Malthouse and Chequers and this and that, I don't think there would be as much difficulty in trying to sell customs union Brexit as Brexit enough for most people.
If May had said that we need a permanent customs union at the outset to resolve the Irish issue...it would be done and dusted.... She should have put her red line at the single market...
Seriously, who gives a fuck about doing trade deals with fuck knows where...for fuck knows what.... when we do all our trade in the EU?
A lot of the 'libertarian pirate island' Conservatives do obsess about trade deals - or at least did, seeing Liam Fox in action has perhaps been a bit of a downer for them.
It would also be anathema to the ERG death culters.
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.
Conscionable for now. I don't think it would stop at May's Deal plus Customs Union. Vested interests would want agriculture to be in; fisheries to be in; financial services to be in. We would want the EU to help out with third party arrangements. We might even want to buy influence with the EU through big payments. So we could end up close to Common Market 2.0 or the EEA+CU arrangements that have been so massively down voted in parliament today.
The key point is that accepting a CU add on opens May's Deal to be amended out of recognition, when she has claimed it's the only deal on offer. Those trade offs between disconnection and damage limitation will be made later.
Clearly, if we sign up to the CU we are accepting no freedom to do our own trade deals. We are accepting being bound by the deals the EU negotiates. These have greatly favoured goods over services to our disadvantage even inside the EU so they are hardly likely to get better once we have left. We are bound by EU tariffs which give EU states a continued competitive advantage in our market. We are likely to be bound to comply with EU regulations in relation to goods etc because the overlap between the CU and the SM are considerable in that both are intended to facilitate free movement of goods. OTOH Disruption of trade and supply chain links with the EU largely disappear. The backstop largely ceases to be an issue. There is probably a majority for it in the Commons.
Like Max it is not what I would have chosen but given where we are it seems the best viable option (assuming May's deal isn't).
Because "trade deals" were what politicians said we voted for. When they were unable or unwilling to admit it was immigration.
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.
I agree with that but what is clear is that we need to do a lot more homework and preparation before setting out into the bright new world and we haven't even started. My priority at this stage are to get out of the EU with the minimum of disruption to our trade. A Customs Union does that and really ought to get even Corbyn's support since that is supposed to be his position allowing the ERG, DUP and sundry other nutters to be outvoted if necessary.
I agree a Customs Union bolted on probably gets a majority (even if not Corbyn, there's enough Labour MPs who oppose Remain for whom a CU would be enough), but it would probably come with a big condition - a long Article 50 extension, and proof that the government is negotiating a CU in good faith, before those Labour MPs agree to throw away their insurance policy by ratifying the withdrawal agreement. You can't expect Labour MPs to just have blind faith in whichever Tory leader replaces May.
We don't need to negotiate the terms of the CU. We are already in it and it was updated in 2016. Its an off the shelf bolt on. The only question is whether the EU would allow us to be in it without payment.
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.
Yes, things stay as they are - n days from leaving with no deal. A no vote in a confirmatory referendum brings us back to this point.
No, if people don't want the proposition then the process ends.
Well, that means No Deal. Not Remain. The process didn't start with the first referendum.
You know that isn't going to happen. No deal has been rejected comprehensively multiple times now. It is off the table; the PM said as much earlier in the week.
Revoke just got rejected as well...
Because MPs will want us to do it for them.
Honestly it's like going round in circles. "This time Corbyn means it". You're getting played. Corbyn is a hard brexit no deal supporter. The wording is precisely the way it is because he's a hard brexit no deal supporter.
In reality he isn't as there is a risk Labour falls behind TIG if it enables No Deal
"but not for a generational vote. For that you need to include the losers."
So if we have an Indyref2, and leave wins, the Scots have to include the losers. Hmm … How would that work? Give 'em a touch more devolution and call it quits? Do you want to tell them?
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.
Yes, things stay as they are - n days from leaving with no deal. A no vote in a confirmatory referendum brings us back to this point.
No, if people don't want the proposition then the process ends.
Well, that means No Deal. Not Remain. The process didn't start with the first referendum.
You know that isn't going to happen. No deal has been rejected comprehensively multiple times now. It is off the table; the PM said as much earlier in the week.
Revoke just got rejected as well...
Because MPs will want us to do it for them.
Honestly it's like going round in circles. "This time Corbyn means it". You're getting played. Corbyn is a hard brexit no deal supporter. The wording is precisely the way it is because he's a hard brexit no deal supporter.
It won't depend on Corbyn. The chances of a referendum are still less than evens - in part because of the different preferences that we are arguing out. But the political realities of the Commons are that IF there is a referendum, the only one that will be offered is Deal versus Remain.
Given how confused even us wonks can get about what is the customs union or a customs union and what the single market is or Norway+ and Malthouse and Chequers and this and that, I don't think there would be as much difficulty in trying to sell customs union Brexit as Brexit enough for most people.
If May had said that we need a permanent customs union at the outset to resolve the Irish issue...it would be done and dusted.... She should have put her red line at the single market...
Seriously, who gives a fuck about doing trade deals with fuck knows where...for fuck knows what.... when we do all our trade in the EU?
A lot of the 'libertarian pirate island' Conservatives do obsess about trade deals - or at least did, seeing Liam Fox in action has perhaps been a bit of a downer for them.
It would also be anathema to the ERG death culters.
Keeping EU customs and agriculture solves the Irish border, and most of the other Channel isdues and keeps out chlorinated chicken. Clearly these are all good.
Am I right that 3rd party EU trade deals, such as South Korea, don't automatically carry over to UK?
If someone can explain to me how the second round of indicative votes is meant to be more successful than the first, given MPs could vote in favour of multiple options today, please do a quick thread header, because I've lost this now.
Frankly, this evening, I feel that the crew of Air France 447 could do a better job than parliament of navigating us through Brexit.
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.
Yes, things stay as they are - n days from leaving with no deal. A no vote in a confirmatory referendum brings us back to this point.
No, if people don't want the proposition then the process ends.
Well, that means No Deal. Not Remain. The process didn't start with the first referendum.
You know that isn't going to happen. No deal has been rejected comprehensively multiple times now. It is off the table; the PM said as much earlier in the week.
So has everything else.
Point is, confirmatory referendum means Yes/No. As you said, No means we stay as we are. Which, right now, is leaving with No Deal, unless something happens to change it. If we get an extension to hold a confirmatory referendum, then the default is still Leave with No Deal, only later. So if we vote No, we are right back where we started.
There is no point in having a referendum unless both sides of the question take us to a clear end state. And that end state is never going to be no deal. That's the simple political reality.
The end of a no isn't no deal, it's just where we are now asking Parliament to make any decision. You may be right that they would vote to revoke if it was a no, but that would be a decision taken by MPs rather than a no vote. If anything I expect it would lead to an extension and an election.
"but not for a generational vote. For that you need to include the losers."
So if we have an Indyref2, and leave wins, the Scots have to include the losers. Hmm … How would that work? Give 'em a touch more devolution and call it quits? Do you want to tell them?
Sadly or happily the EU ref gave plenty of scope for accommodating different views and stakeholders.
Comments
Come, friendly bombs, and fall on Slough!
It isn't fit for humans now,
There isn't grass to graze a cow.
Swarm over, Death!
I just need to substitute Westminster for Slough and come up with a good rhyme to replace now/cow...
They've committed a fraud on their electorates.
As a Remainer the best thing about the EU was freedom of movement , I could care less now what happens unless it involves FOM .
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/36/section/1/enacted
Labour is leading it's remain supporters up the garden path with this wording. Otherwise why not just come out and say "deal vs remain"?
If there were 8 different proposals on how to reform the NHS and parties said there would be a free vote and a Labour whip voted for the proposal "privatise it all" then I would expect that whip to be fired.
No no no no,
No no no no,
No no,
They're all nitwits!
They didn’t need to.
May could end this all now if she swung behind a CU or behind a confirmatory ref.
Which is the least awful option from her perspective?
For that reason, and the historical precedent that a GE is the safety valve of our system, then we are well past the point that one needs to be called, no matter how inconvenient to all concerned.
Confirmatory is just part of a motion now, there would need to be legislation going through all the motions and both houses of Parliament to enact it. No way it gets through that without Remain being an option.
But as we know we're in no shape to conduct an independent trade policy at present.
No problem there, none whatsoever.
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584
We'd just have to hope his MPs ignored him.
Seriously, who gives a fuck about doing trade deals with fuck knows where...for fuck knows what.... when we do all our trade in the EU?
There will have to be a Customs Deal done - so give it some fancy new branding and it might just fly
How MPs voted for each option, it is at the bottom of the article.
Who could possibly be in favour of that?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/03/22/theresa-may-gambles-customs-union-vote-boris-johnson-reminds/
https://twitter.com/firstdogsSB
The main object of Monday's process is to get people to choose between the available options (there may be a case for inserting May's deal back into the process). So there aren't any "no" votes in the same way as electing an MP has no "none" option. Then hope that whatever emerges can carry the house at the end.
Point is, confirmatory referendum means Yes/No. As you said, No means we stay as we are. Which, right now, is leaving with No Deal, unless something happens to change it. If we get an extension to hold a confirmatory referendum, then the default is still Leave with No Deal, only later. So if we vote No, we are right back where we started.
https://www.instagram.com/henrythecoloradodog/?hl=en
https://www.instagram.com/p/BhxDfMUhxXo/
But only if the sword gets through the HoC.
What are the odds on Grieve losing the vote of no confidence due at Friday's meeting of his constituency association? Are there moves against any of the others?
Clearly, if we sign up to the CU we are accepting no freedom to do our own trade deals.
We are accepting being bound by the deals the EU negotiates. These have greatly favoured goods over services to our disadvantage even inside the EU so they are hardly likely to get better once we have left.
We are bound by EU tariffs which give EU states a continued competitive advantage in our market.
We are likely to be bound to comply with EU regulations in relation to goods etc because the overlap between the CU and the SM are considerable in that both are intended to facilitate free movement of goods.
OTOH
Disruption of trade and supply chain links with the EU largely disappear.
The backstop largely ceases to be an issue.
There is probably a majority for it in the Commons.
Like Max it is not what I would have chosen but given where we are it seems the best viable option (assuming May's deal isn't).
Progress.
It would also be anathema to the ERG death culters.
The key point is that accepting a CU add on opens May's Deal to be amended out of recognition, when she has claimed it's the only deal on offer. Those trade offs between disconnection and damage limitation will be made later.
There were abstentions too.
"but not for a generational vote. For that you need to include the losers."
So if we have an Indyref2, and leave wins, the Scots have to include the losers. Hmm … How would that work? Give 'em a touch more devolution and call it quits? Do you want to tell them?
Am I right that 3rd party EU trade deals, such as South Korea, don't automatically carry over to UK?
Frankly, this evening, I feel that the crew of Air France 447 could do a better job than parliament of navigating us through Brexit.