This article was post earlier, but for the wage slaves amongst us here is evidence not just of EU thinking how to rescue us after no deal, but Plenty of decisions for lame duck before trexit
39 billion decisions
It was agreed among the member states that for there to be any talks after the UK has crashed out, the bloc’s 27 capitals will expect Downing Street to agree to signal by 18 April that it will pay the £39bn Brexit bill despite the failure of the Commons to ratify the withdrawal agreement. Ambassadors agreed they would expect the UK to come back to the negotiating table “pretty soon with an ask to ensure the vital lines and procedures needed for the UK to survive”.
To me Barnier comes across as keen to go to no deal. Every sentence is variation on its up to London, he will simply change it to its all London’s fault. Barnier still had ambition two years ago but knows he’s finished now?
I sense Tusk keen to keep fighting to keep us in. But it’s not decision for commission, and I sense Germany and France have decided to let us fall out, so they can pick up the pieces and move on.
There are reports that we have got to the point where the EU thinks the cost to them of us leaving with No Deal is now little moe than the cost of us staying, especially if a long extension is involved.
So No Deal is still more costly to them then, the reason they granted the extensions of Art 50 in the first place.
If we choose No Deal they are prepared for it but they know there is a majority in the Commons against No Deal
Socialist governments do not last long unless they become dictatorships, Attlee lasted 6 and barely held its majority after only 1 term, Wilson's last 6 and then with Callaghan (and neither were as left as Corbyn), Hollande lasted only 1 term and had Macron not emerged Hollande would have been trounced by Sarkozy or Fillon for re election, in Greece Syriza now trails the centre right badly etc
As a historical observation, Attlee's Government was elected in unique circumstances and, to be fair, the Conservatives, mainly led by the Reform Group including such notables such as Rab Butler, Iain MacLeod and a young Edward Heath, pulled the Party away from its pre-war agenda and accepted much of the Beveridge and later Attlee programmes including nationalisation and the NHS.
As for Wilson, I wouldn't call the 1964-70 Government socialist - technocratic certainly and social democratic in many respects. Had the relations with the Unions been solved via In Place of Strife, it might have set a Government pattern for the 70s and beyond.
The returning Wilson/Callaghan Government faced huge problems - I do think the Lib/Lab Pact achieved a lot bringing down inflation and unemployment during its life - but the battle for Labour's soul was being won by Militant and the journey of Jenkins and the moderates to the SDP had already begun by 1979. Had Callaghan gone to the country in the autumn of 1978 he might have won though I think another Hung Parliament more likely.
This article was post earlier, but for the wage slaves amongst us here is evidence not just of EU thinking how to rescue us after no deal, but Plenty of decisions for lame duck before trexit
39 billion decisions
It was agreed among the member states that for there to be any talks after the UK has crashed out, the bloc’s 27 capitals will expect Downing Street to agree to signal by 18 April that it will pay the £39bn Brexit bill despite the failure of the Commons to ratify the withdrawal agreement. Ambassadors agreed they would expect the UK to come back to the negotiating table “pretty soon with an ask to ensure the vital lines and procedures needed for the UK to survive”.
To me Barnier comes across as keen to go to no deal. Every sentence is variation on its up to London, he will simply change it to its all London’s fault. Barnier still had ambition two years ago but knows he’s finished now?
I sense Tusk keen to keep fighting to keep us in. But it’s not decision for commission, and I sense Germany and France have decided to let us fall out, so they can pick up the pieces and move on.
There are reports that we have got to the point where the EU thinks the cost to them of us leaving with No Deal is now little moe than the cost of us staying, especially if a long extension is involved.
Plus they don’t want Farage and the brexit party in the EP
This article was post earlier, but for the wage slaves amongst us here is evidence not just of EU thinking how to rescue us after no deal, but Plenty of decisions for lame duck before trexit
39 billion decisions
It was agreed among the member states that for there to be any talks after the UK has crashed out, the bloc’s 27 capitals will expect Downing Street to agree to signal by 18 April that it will pay the £39bn Brexit bill despite the failure of the Commons to ratify the withdrawal agreement. Ambassadors agreed they would expect the UK to come back to the negotiating table “pretty soon with an ask to ensure the vital lines and procedures needed for the UK to survive”.
To me Barnier comes across as keen to go to no deal. Every sentence is variation on its up to London, he will simply change it to its all London’s fault. Barnier still had ambition two years ago but knows he’s finished now?
I sense Tusk keen to keep fighting to keep us in. But it’s not decision for commission, and I sense Germany and France have decided to let us fall out, so they can pick up the pieces and move on.
I think you make a valid point. France and Germany could see no deal as an opportunity for them to steal business and the city from London . They want to pick away our corpse. Especially the french
The lady Macron has placed in charge project kick them out is very aggressive
If as expected the WA fails tomorrow under what scenario is it even remotely possible we could still no deal exit, surely parliament will just approve second vote on Monday and TM will shrug her shoulders either way the Tory party is screwed
Are you serious. No deal is becoming very likely and no, the HOC will not just approve a second vote and that is it. Legislation is needed in just 14 days to stop no deal
She will just revoke when push comes to shove, but maybe not if she’s confident no deal will be less worse for the tories than revoke ?
Parliament will not allow No Deal. You saw how popular it was in the indicative vote.
How though
If there's a will.....
My guess is that her senior colleagues would tell her to revoke and resign, if push came to shove, but in practice I doubt it would come to that.
This article was post earlier, but for the wage slaves amongst us here is evidence not just of EU thinking how to rescue us after no deal, but Plenty of decisions for lame duck before trexit
39 billion decisions
It was agreed among the member states that for there to be any talks after the UK has crashed out, the bloc’s 27 capitals will expect Downing Street to agree to signal by 18 April that it will pay the £39bn Brexit bill despite the failure of the Commons to ratify the withdrawal agreement. Ambassadors agreed they would expect the UK to come back to the negotiating table “pretty soon with an ask to ensure the vital lines and procedures needed for the UK to survive”.
To me Barnier comes across as keen to go to no deal. Every sentence is variation on its up to London, he will simply change it to its all London’s fault. Barnier still had ambition two years ago but knows he’s finished now?
I sense Tusk keen to keep fighting to keep us in. But it’s not decision for commission, and I sense Germany and France have decided to let us fall out, so they can pick up the pieces and move on.
There are reports that we have got to the point where the EU thinks the cost to them of us leaving with No Deal is now little moe than the cost of us staying, especially if a long extension is involved.
So No Deal is still more costly to them then
Not to any individual Nation though they still trade on Zero tariffs with other 26 Nations
Callaghan sounds rather competent, commanding and statesmanlike to me. Rather surprising.
Different breed back then.
Maybe it’s just nostalgia but listening to both Maggie and Callaghan they sound like titans compared with today’s front benches.
It’s quite interesting listening to Callaghan attacking the free market in principle, as if it’s a bad thing, and explaining the need for a command economy where the Government and Unions decide.
It was the end of a different era. Britain during WW2 was as close as a capitalist economy can get to a full command economy, and it worked well (in contradistinction to Germany, which did not convert its civilian economy to a war footing until late in the war). The consensus from 45 to 79 was Butskellism, a paternal acceptance of nationalised industries, state intervention, and a horror of unemployment. It got you the NHS, council housing, two baby booms (vaccination and NHS saved a lot of children's lives), expanded schooling, and Concorde. However the 60/70's brought the collapse of Bretton Woods, the collapse of the gold standard, the oil shock, Vietnam and the three day week. The old instincts could not cope with new circumstances, the consensus collapsed, and we got Thatcher.
Things are similar now: the 79-2010ish neoliberal consensus (low tax, central bank independence, free movement) has died and we are still unsure what to replace it with. The number of democracies worldwide is falling and freedom is restricted: witness China's appalling social credit system. I don't know what will replace the neoliberal consensus but I suspect I will neither like nor approve of it.
IF the WA falls tomorrow, would you support May going to the EU for a prolonged extension (maybe as long as 2 years) and then standing down?
The alternative seems to be to go to No Deal on 12/4 and basically see what happens. I doubt the sky will fall in but it may not be very easy canvassing for the Government between than and May 2nd.
One last thing, apparently May and Corbyn spoke on the phone for 20 minutes today. What the heck did they find to talk about for 20 minutes? There is no possibility of either agreeing to back the position of the other, and it doesn't take that long to formally summarise what justifications each will use for their partisan political actions.
It is almost impressive the MPs don't just give up and vote for the WA, on the basis that it at last, finally, ends this current phase at least. But of course that's why they cannot give up, ever. Once we're out despite the confidence of many rejoiners, it might be it. They cannot give in now. And the DUP are just stubborn and cannot see past the whip handle they are holding over the Tories, and the ERG are just DUP proxies at this point.
This article was post earlier, but for the wage slaves amongst us here is evidence not just of EU thinking how to rescue us after no deal, but Plenty of decisions for lame duck before trexit
39 billion decisions
It was agreed among the member states that for there to be any talks after the UK has crashed out, the bloc’s 27 capitals will expect Downing Street to agree to signal by 18 April that it will pay the £39bn Brexit bill despite the failure of the Commons to ratify the withdrawal agreement. Ambassadors agreed they would expect the UK to come back to the negotiating table “pretty soon with an ask to ensure the vital lines and procedures needed for the UK to survive”.
To me Barnier comes across as keen to go to no deal. Every sentence is variation on its up to London, he will simply change it to its all London’s fault. Barnier still had ambition two years ago but knows he’s finished now?
I sense Tusk keen to keep fighting to keep us in. But it’s not decision for commission, and I sense Germany and France have decided to let us fall out, so they can pick up the pieces and move on.
Merkel certainly has not, she does not want No Deal, Macron despite the early protests granted the extension last time
This article was post earlier, but for the wage slaves amongst us here is evidence not just of EU thinking how to rescue us after no deal, but Plenty of decisions for lame duck before trexit
39 billion decisions
It was agreed among the member states that for there to be any talks after the UK has crashed out, the bloc’s 27 capitals will expect Downing Street to agree to signal by 18 April that it will pay the £39bn Brexit bill despite the failure of the Commons to ratify the withdrawal agreement. Ambassadors agreed they would expect the UK to come back to the negotiating table “pretty soon with an ask to ensure the vital lines and procedures needed for the UK to survive”.
To me Barnier comes across as keen to go to no deal. Every sentence is variation on its up to London, he will simply change it to its all London’s fault. Barnier still had ambition two years ago but knows he’s finished now?
I sense Tusk keen to keep fighting to keep us in. But it’s not decision for commission, and I sense Germany and France have decided to let us fall out, so they can pick up the pieces and move on.
There are reports that we have got to the point where the EU thinks the cost to them of us leaving with No Deal is now little moe than the cost of us staying, especially if a long extension is involved.
Plus they don’t want Farage and the brexit party in the EP
Totally agree with both of you. And the point about vultures feeding on our corpse.
Sure there is hit for EU from No Brexit, but this is offset by other concerns now, signs EU politically shop tired, wanting to go back to dealing with other important things. EU signalling reputational damage for themselves if they kick resolution down road, to prolong uncertainty will inflict more economic woe upon already creaking economies and business. With continued farce in Westminster (which they to an extent set up for us) EU are right to assure themselves Britain will get bulk of blame for any Brexit pain, this creates optimal moment for EU to let No Deal happen. Reinforcing this optimal moment is EU not wanting us in those EU elections, don’t underestimate this argument, of damage to their project from UK continuing to participate in EU democracy without being around to abide those decisions, this contention could snowball in Europe in coming weeks giving perfect cover to exclude us.
"The investigation was launched after radio station LBC obtained a leaked Labour dossier detailing anti-Semitic social media messages allegedly posted by party members."
OK, so just catching up, what's the PB consensus - is May's "separate the WA and PD from the MV" idea (so many acronyms) genius, insane, desperate or does it not matter either way cos it's not going to get voted through anyway?
The last - and a sign of desperation, and a displacement activity.
The thing is, if the margin of defeat is smaller than 149 then May will cling onto the hope that another vote, of some sort, will finally pass the thing. It's a Parliamentary version of Zeno's Paradox.
It’s easy to see how Labour will take this gimmicky vote apart tomorrow.
Everyone knows what the government put in the PD. Now they have taken scissors to it, snipped that bit off and saying it’s changed now vote for it.
It’s political game playing. It’s a game of trying to pass the brexit blame. It’s sixth form standard even by the standard of May’s hapless business managers.
things have taken a darker turn the last few days. It’s not even entertaining anymore. If there were still bridges between government and DUP, tomorrow’s gimmick of trying to pin brexit on Labour burns those bridges down. If passed it stitches the DUP up with the backstop. It’s a tactic screaming government have given up trying to get the DUP on board. Is it not?
And if there was ever a chance of getting enough Labour MPs to make a difference, Mays resignation, prospect of harder Brexit PM and negotiation team, and the blanker the brexit cheque asking Labour MPs to sign up to has probably closed off that route for passing WA too.
Having said all that, Labour really do have to take this last chance to avoid the no deal exit. If they keep spurning these opportunities and the result is no deal exit, its the Labour Party that dies, not the Conservatives.
Both Labour and the Tories would see defections to TIG if No Deal.
TIG would probably win the next general election comfortably after the economic damage of No Deal on a SM and or CU BINO or rejoin the EU ticket and become the UK En Marche.
Indeed given Corbyn can only become PM with SNP support it may be the SNP who force the switch to SM and Customs Union BINO otherwise they will demand indyref2 if we are in a No Deal scenario and have a good chance of winning it in which case Corbyn loses power anyway
Good to see you talking no deal brexit HY after ruling it out up until now.
Remarkable the way HY swings from one wild prediction to another. It's just as well he doesn't gamble! Still, if TIG do "win the next GE comfortably" we read it here first,
Only in the event of No Deal would TIG I think win but No Deal would probably require a Boris or Raab government winning a snap general election after May's Deal fails, Corbyn cannot become PM without the SNP who will demand renegotiating with the EU BINO as the price of their support. So TIG would really be winning the general election after next
Good luck to TIG getting 310 defections and getting every single MP re-elected in the 320 remainiest constituencies.
Callaghan sounds rather competent, commanding and statesmanlike to me. Rather surprising.
Different breed back then.
Maybe it’s just nostalgia but listening to both Maggie and Callaghan they sound like titans compared with today’s front benches.
It’s quite interesting listening to Callaghan attacking the free market in principle, as if it’s a bad thing, and explaining the need for a command economy where the Government and Unions decide.
It was the end of a different era. Britain during WW2 was as close as a capitalist economy can get to a full command economy, and it worked well (in contradistinction to Germany, which did not convert its civilian economy to a war footing until late in the war). The consensus from 45 to 79 was Butskellism, a paternal acceptance of nationalised industries, state intervention, and a horror of unemployment. It got you the NHS, council housing, two baby booms (vaccination and NHS saved a lot of children's lives), expanded schooling, and Concorde. However the 60/70's brought the collapse of Bretton Woods, the collapse of the gold standard, the oil shock, Vietnam and the three day week. The old instincts could not cope with new circumstances, the consensus collapsed, and we got Thatcher.
Things are similar now: the 79-2010ish neoliberal consensus (low tax, central bank independence, free movement) has died and we are still unsure what to replace it with. The number of democracies worldwide is falling and freedom is restricted: witness China's appalling social credit system. I don't know what will replace the neoliberal consensus but I suspect I will neither like nor approve of it.
I don’t see any reason not to take the figures pretty much at face value. The various analyses of the data have strikingly shown very normal patterns.
1%ish so only 50,000 odd. I thought it’d be much more
And there is no suggestion that all or any of the 50,000 are illegitimate.
I don't understand your position anyway. I understand that you think people who would like to remain are wrong, misguided, stupid and for all i know evil and treacherous, but do you really think they don't exist or are so few that they can't gather 5m legitimate signatures?
OK, so just catching up, what's the PB consensus - is May's "separate the WA and PD from the MV" idea (so many acronyms) genius, insane, desperate or does it not matter either way cos it's not going to get voted through anyway?
The last - and a sign of desperation, and a displacement activity.
Blame game I suspect but not likely to be successful even with that limited objective.
I can’t work out what Theresa May does if, as now looks likely, Parliament coalesces around an option she has ruled out. She looks checkmated whatever she does.
The chess term you are looking for is Zugzwang.
"Zugzwang (German for "compulsion to move", pronounced [ˈtsuːktsvaŋ]) is a situation found in chess and other games wherein one player is put at a disadvantage because they must make a move when they would prefer to pass and not move. The fact that the player is compelled to move means that their position will become significantly weaker. A player is said to be "in zugzwang" when any possible move will worsen their position."
Callaghan sounds rather competent, commanding and statesmanlike to me. Rather surprising.
Different breed back then.
Maybe it’s just nostalgia but listening to both Maggie and Callaghan they sound like titans compared with today’s front benches.
It’s quite interesting listening to Callaghan attacking the free market in principle, as if it’s a bad thing, and explaining the need for a command economy where the Government and Unions decide.
It was the end of a different era. Britain during WW2 was as close as a capitalist economy can get to a full command economy, and it worked well (in contradistinction to Germany, which did not convert its civilian economy to a war footing until late in the war). The consensus from 45 to 79 was Butskellism, a paternal acceptance of nationalised industries, state intervention, and a horror of unemployment. It got you the NHS, council housing, two baby booms (vaccination and NHS saved a lot of children's lives), expanded schooling, and Concorde. However the 60/70's brought the collapse of Bretton Woods, the collapse of the gold standard, the oil shock, Vietnam and the three day week. The old instincts could not cope with new circumstances, the consensus collapsed, and we got Thatcher.
Things are similar now: the 79-2010ish neoliberal consensus (low tax, central bank independence, free movement) has died and we are still unsure what to replace it with. The number of democracies worldwide is falling and freedom is restricted: witness China's appalling social credit system. I don't know what will replace the neoliberal consensus but I suspect I will neither like nor approve of it.
Your final paragraph is very interesting.
I am also very worried about it.
The best bulwark against a resurgent illiberal statism is to be part of a bloc with an inherent structural commitment towards open markets and societies.
IF the WA falls tomorrow, would you support May going to the EU for a prolonged extension (maybe as long as 2 years) and then standing down?
The alternative seems to be to go to No Deal on 12/4 and basically see what happens. I doubt the sky will fall in but it may not be very easy canvassing for the Government between than and May 2nd.
The EU will not give any extension without a purpose. Listening to news from Europe they do not want us taking part in the EU elections, they do not want our membership, and they will no deal if necessary
We have very little goodwill in Europe and why should we be surprised
Callaghan sounds rather competent, commanding and statesmanlike to me. Rather surprising.
Different breed back then.
Maybe it’s just nostalgia but listening to both Maggie and Callaghan they sound like titans compared with today’s front benches.
It’s quite interesting listening to Callaghan attacking the free market in principle, as if it’s a bad thing, and explaining the need for a command economy where the Government and Unions decide.
The number of democracies worldwide is falling and freedom is restricted: witness China's appalling social credit system. I don't know what will replace the neoliberal consensus but I suspect I will neither like nor approve of it.
Is that true? Nearly all of Latin America, most of Africa, and Emerging Asia are democracies now even if imperfect ones. China and MENA being the principal exceptions. This is quiet yet dramatic progress over recent decades.
This article was post earlier, but for the wage slaves amongst us here is evidence not just of EU thinking how to rescue us after no deal, but Plenty of decisions for lame duck before trexit
39 billion decisions
It was agreed among the member states that for there to be any talks after the UK has crashed out, the bloc’s 27 capitals will expect Downing Street to agree to signal by 18 April that it will pay the £39bn Brexit bill despite the failure of the Commons to ratify the withdrawal agreement. Ambassadors agreed they would expect the UK to come back to the negotiating table “pretty soon with an ask to ensure the vital lines and procedures needed for the UK to survive”.
To me Barnier comes across as keen to go to no deal. Every sentence is variation on its up to London, he will simply change it to its all London’s fault. Barnier still had ambition two years ago but knows he’s finished now?
I sense Tusk keen to keep fighting to keep us in. But it’s not decision for commission, and I sense Germany and France have decided to let us fall out, so they can pick up the pieces and move on.
There are reports that we have got to the point where the EU thinks the cost to them of us leaving with No Deal is now little moe than the cost of us staying, especially if a long extension is involved.
I doubt that.
What the EU really want of course is for us to stay, for euroscepticism to be expunged for good and for us to embrace the central project.
But, failing that, the £10bn a year, stabilising the EU politically and economically and showing Leaving to be a forlorn hope will do, and they can hold our their hopes for another day.
I don’t see any reason not to take the figures pretty much at face value. The various analyses of the data have strikingly shown very normal patterns.
1%ish so only 50,000 odd. I thought it’d be much more
And there is no suggestion that all or any of the 50,000 are illegitimate.
I don't understand your position anyway. I understand that you think people who would like to remain are wrong, misguided, stupid and for all i know evil and treacherous, but do you really think they don't exist or are so few that they can't gather 5m legitimate signatures?
I’d say they lacked empathy rather than any of those things. I don’t doubt they exist, I knew 16m voted to remain, and this petition is open to people who weren’t able to vote too. But I thought they’d try and game the numbers more than that.
If as expected the WA fails tomorrow under what scenario is it even remotely possible we could still no deal exit, surely parliament will just approve second vote on Monday and TM will shrug her shoulders either way the Tory party is screwed
Are you serious. No deal is becoming very likely and no, the HOC will not just approve a second vote and that is it. Legislation is needed in just 14 days to stop no deal
She will just revoke when push comes to shove, but maybe not if she’s confident no deal will be less worse for the tories than revoke ?
She cannot just revoke. The HOC need to mandate it
I think she can. I don't think she should, but that's different.
If as expected the WA fails tomorrow under what scenario is it even remotely possible we could still no deal exit, surely parliament will just approve second vote on Monday and TM will shrug her shoulders either way the Tory party is screwed
Are you serious. No deal is becoming very likely and no, the HOC will not just approve a second vote and that is it. Legislation is needed in just 14 days to stop no deal
She will just revoke when push comes to shove, but maybe not if she’s confident no deal will be less worse for the tories than revoke ?
Parliament will not allow No Deal. You saw how popular it was in the indicative vote.
How though
If there's a will.....
My guess is that her senior colleagues would tell her to revoke and resign, if push came to shove, but in practice I doubt it would come to that.
To revoke the HOC needs to agree to the EU elections and revocation
Difficult to see a winner frankly. I can’t see Gove becoming party leader after he knifed Johnson in the back last time and given how he antagonised the teachers. Johnson has no obvious qualities beyond being a good journalist but he seems to be the members choice if he made it to the MPs short list. Hunt and Javid are all talk and no substance. Raab would have a good chance but only if Johnson doesnt stand.
Whoever wins needs to have a lot more charisma and campaigning skills than May, but that’s not setting the bar particularly high.
The teachers Gove antagonised ain't Conservative members.
A lot of them were before he got the job, as were a lot of doctors before Hunt became Health Sec
Tories running out of supporters. Soon it’ll be just farmers and Tommy Robinson supporters.
Farmers are bricking it over No Deal, so not even farmers might be supporting the Tories.
Losing all their subsidies didn’t do NZ’s farmers any harm - but to scrap those means being a capitalist and supporting primacy of consumer interests and competition. Probably explains why Gov has promised to safeguard subsidies.
Indeed
It did for those farmers that weren't large enough or didn't get suitably efficient quickly enough.
Just because things are fine in NZ now doesn't mean that a lot of farmers didn't suffer and things changed.
That's right. Transitioning to a sustainable (subsistence free) state was extremely painful in New Zealand. The move somewhat mirrors what happened in the UK in the 1980s, as unprofitable industries across the country were shut down.
But here's the big difference.
The Conservative Party of 2019 holds all the rural seats.
Until the 1970s, New Zealand was basically contracted out additional farmland for the UK.
OK, so just catching up, what's the PB consensus - is May's "separate the WA and PD from the MV" idea (so many acronyms) genius, insane, desperate or does it not matter either way cos it's not going to get voted through anyway?
The last - and a sign of desperation, and a displacement activity.
The thing is, if the margin of defeat is smaller than 149 then May will cling onto the hope that another vote, of some sort, will finally pass the thing. It's a Parliamentary version of Zeno's Paradox.
'You mean we only lost by 148?! So there's hope!!!!!!!'
"The investigation was launched after radio station LBC obtained a leaked Labour dossier detailing anti-Semitic social media messages allegedly posted by party members."
IF the WA falls tomorrow, would you support May going to the EU for a prolonged extension (maybe as long as 2 years) and then standing down?
The alternative seems to be to go to No Deal on 12/4 and basically see what happens. I doubt the sky will fall in but it may not be very easy canvassing for the Government between than and May 2nd.
I would and it seems that is what she is likely to do, though I suspect she would then lose a VONC as the ERG hardliners would no confidence with her and we end up with a Corbyn and SNP government and renegotiating in a lengthy extension based on SM and CU BINO anyway.
I cannot see the government surviving No Deal either, enough Tory Remain and BINO diehards would abstain or VONC the government to force a general election but May has made clear she is not going to pursue No Deal anyway unless the Commons votes for it, she will go for long extension and contest the European elections
"The investigation was launched after radio station LBC obtained a leaked Labour dossier detailing anti-Semitic social media messages allegedly posted by party members."
Callaghan sounds rather competent, commanding and statesmanlike to me. Rather surprising.
Different breed back then.
Maybe it’s just nostalgia but listening to both Maggie and Callaghan they sound like titans compared with today’s front benches.
It’s quite interesting listening to Callaghan attacking the free market in principle, as if it’s a bad thing, and explaining the need for a command economy where the Government and Unions decide.
It was the end of a different era. Britain during WW2 was as close as a capitalist economy can get to a full command economy, and it worked well (in contradistinction to Germany, which did not convert its civilian economy to a war footing until late in the war). The consensus from 45 to 79 was Butskellism, a paternal acceptance of nationalised industries, state intervention, and a horror of unemployment. It got you the NHS, council housing, two baby booms (vaccination and NHS saved a lot of children's lives), expanded schooling, and Concorde. However the 60/70's brought the collapse of Bretton Woods, the collapse of the gold standard, the oil shock, Vietnam and the three day week. The old instincts could not cope with new circumstances, the consensus collapsed, and we got Thatcher.
Things are similar now: the 79-2010ish neoliberal consensus (low tax, central bank independence, free movement) has died and we are still unsure what to replace it with. The number of democracies worldwide is falling and freedom is restricted: witness China's appalling social credit system. I don't know what will replace the neoliberal consensus but I suspect I will neither like nor approve of it.
Your final paragraph is very interesting.
I am also very worried about it.
The best bulwark against a resurgent illiberal statism is to be part of a bloc with an inherent structural commitment towards open markets and societies.
Give it a rest, William.
Being a one-track record is tedious and boring, not persuasive.
Just asked SPIN via their basic web chat whether they are putting up a spread on the vote tomorrow but the staff member replying didn’t know, essentially saying check in the morning when the politics trader is in.
Callaghan sounds rather competent, commanding and statesmanlike to me. Rather surprising.
Different breed back then.
Maybe it’s just nostalgia but listening to both Maggie and Callaghan they sound like titans compared with today’s front benches.
It’s quite interesting listening to Callaghan attacking the free market in principle, as if it’s a bad thing, and explaining the need for a command economy where the Government and Unions decide.
It was the end of a different era. Britain during WW2 was as close as a capitalist economy can get to a full command economy, and it worked well (in contradistinction to Germany, which did not convert its civilian economy to a war footing until late in the war). The consensus from 45 to 79 was Butskellism, a paternal acceptance of nationalised industries, state intervention, and a horror of unemployment. It got you the NHS, council housing, two baby booms (vaccination and NHS saved a lot of children's lives), expanded schooling, and Concorde. However the 60/70's brought the collapse of Bretton Woods, the collapse of the gold standard, the oil shock, Vietnam and the three day week. The old instincts could not cope with new circumstances, the consensus collapsed, and we got Thatcher.
Things are similar now: the 79-2010ish neoliberal consensus (low tax, central bank independence, free movement) has died and we are still unsure what to replace it with. The number of democracies worldwide is falling and freedom is restricted: witness China's appalling social credit system. I don't know what will replace the neoliberal consensus but I suspect I will neither like nor approve of it.
There are still some neoliberals in power, Macron for example (Turnbull until a few months ago), however the biggest growth in politics is the rise of the populist right, Salvini, Le Pen, Vox, Boris and Brexit, Trump etc and the populist Left, Corbyn, Melenchon, Sanders, Podemos etc.
We should still remember we are still far more democratic than we were even in the 1970s when most of Eastern Europe, China, Russia, Latin America, even Spain and Greece were dictatorships
OK, so just catching up, what's the PB consensus - is May's "separate the WA and PD from the MV" idea (so many acronyms) genius, insane, desperate or does it not matter either way cos it's not going to get voted through anyway?
The last - and a sign of desperation, and a displacement activity.
The thing is, if the margin of defeat is smaller than 149 then May will cling onto the hope that another vote, of some sort, will finally pass the thing. It's a Parliamentary version of Zeno's Paradox.
'You mean we only lost by 148?! So there's hope!!!!!!!'
This article was post earlier, but for the wage slaves amongst us here is evidence not just of EU thinking how to rescue us after no deal, but Plenty of decisions for lame duck before trexit
39 billion decisions
It was agreed among the member states that for there to be any talks after the UK has crashed out, the bloc’s 27 capitals will expect Downing Street to agree to signal by 18 April that it will pay the £39bn Brexit bill despite the failure of the Commons to ratify the withdrawal agreement. Ambassadors agreed they would expect the UK to come back to the negotiating table “pretty soon with an ask to ensure the vital lines and procedures needed for the UK to survive”.
To me Barnier comes across as keen to go to no deal. Every sentence is variation on its up to London, he will simply change it to its all London’s fault. Barnier still had ambition two years ago but knows he’s finished now?
I sense Tusk keen to keep fighting to keep us in. But it’s not decision for commission, and I sense Germany and France have decided to let us fall out, so they can pick up the pieces and move on.
Merkel certainly has not, she does not want No Deal, Macron despite the early protests granted the extension last time
Merkel sighed a resigned sigh, turned to Barnier and actioned him to report back with the best that could be done to honour Good Friday agreement in a No Deal.
You still think they’ll agree to every request to go can kicking with us?
On the other hand, there have been many comments stating that May should have asked parliament what to do before starting negotiations. Yesterday's votes rather severely damage that argument, as it shows there would probably have been no consensus two years ago.
I don't think it does - stuff nearly passed, and that's without much pressure - the votes are just indicative so no point taking a hit for something unpopular - or any whipping on the Con side.
Callaghan sounds rather competent, commanding and statesmanlike to me. Rather surprising.
Different breed back then.
Maybe it’s just nostalgia but listening to both Maggie and Callaghan they sound like titans compared with today’s front benches.
It’s quite interesting listening to Callaghan attacking the free market in principle, as if it’s a bad thing, and explaining the need for a command economy where the Government and Unions decide.
It was the end of a different era. Britain during WW2 was as close as a capitalist economy can get to a full command economy, and it worked well (in contradistinction to Germany, which did not convert its civilian economy to a war footing until late in the war). The consensus from 45 to 79 was Butskellism, a paternal acceptance of nationalised industries, state intervention, and a horror of unemployment. It got you the NHS, council housing, two baby booms (vaccination and NHS saved a lot of children's lives), expanded schooling, and Concorde. However the 60/70's brought the collapse of Bretton Woods, the collapse of the gold standard, the oil shock, Vietnam and the three day week. The old instincts could not cope with new circumstances, the consensus collapsed, and we got Thatcher.
Things are similar now: the 79-2010ish neoliberal consensus (low tax, central bank independence, free movement) has died and we are still unsure what to replace it with. The number of democracies worldwide is falling and freedom is restricted: witness China's appalling social credit system. I don't know what will replace the neoliberal consensus but I suspect I will neither like nor approve of it.
Your final paragraph is very interesting.
I am also very worried about it.
The best bulwark against a resurgent illiberal statism is to be part of a bloc with an inherent structural commitment towards open markets and societies.
Give it a rest, William.
Being a one-track record is tedious and boring, not persuasive.
Congrats to @murali_s - you really can't do that much wrong with respect to the baby (though bear in mind that they will come to expect the levels of attention they get at first). The important thing is to look after yourselves. First and foremost for us was sleep (especially with our first) - there is no point in you both being shattered out of misguided solidarity. Sleep in separate rooms if you have to. All the best!
It’s easy to see how Labour will take this gimmicky vote apart tomorrow.
Everyone knows what the government put in the PD. Now they have taken scissors to it, snipped that bit off and saying it’s changed now vote for it.
It’s political game playing. It’s a game of trying to pass the brexit blame. It’s sixth form standard even by the standard of May’s hapless business managers.
things have taken a darker turn the last few days. It’s not even entertaining anymore. If there were still bridges between government and DUP, tomorrow’s gimmick of trying to pin brexit on Labour burns those bridges down. If passed it stitches the DUP up with the backstop. It’s a tactic screaming government have given up trying to get the DUP on board. Is it not?
And if there was ever a chance of getting enough Labour MPs to make a difference, Mays resignation, prospect of harder Brexit PM and negotiation team, and the blanker the brexit cheque asking Labour MPs to sign up to has probably closed off that route for passing WA too.
Having said all that, Labour really do have to take this last chance to avoid the no deal exit. If they keep spurning these opportunities and the result is no deal exit, its the Labour Party that dies, not the Conservatives.
Both Labourway
Good to see you talking no deal brexit HY after ruling it out up until now.
Remarkable the way HY swings from one wild prediction to another. It's just as well he doesn't gamble! Still, if TIG do "win the next GE comfortably" we read it here first,
Only in the event of No Deal would TIG I think win but No Deal would probably require a Boris or Raab government winning a snap general election after May's Deal fails, Corbyn cannot become PM without the SNP who will demand renegotiating with the EU BINO as the price of their support. So TIG would really be winning the general election after next
Good luck to TIG getting 310 defections and getting every single MP re-elected in the 320 remainiest constituencies.
In the event of a Boris Tories v a Corbyn Labour it could eventually happen, remember En Marche went from nowhere to winning the French presidency and legislative elections in a year and the SDP were polling close to 50% in late 1981 when it was Thatcher v Foot and pre Falklands
This article was post earlier, but for the wage slaves amongst us here is evidence not just of EU thinking how to rescue us after no deal, but Plenty of decisions for lame duck before trexit
39 billion decisions
It was agreed among the member states that for there to be any talks after the UK has crashed out, the bloc’s 27 capitals will expect Downing Street to agree to signal by 18 April that it will pay the £39bn Brexit bill despite the failure of the Commons to ratify the withdrawal agreement. Ambassadors agreed they would expect the UK to come back to the negotiating table “pretty soon with an ask to ensure the vital lines and procedures needed for the UK to survive”.
To me Barnier comes across as keen to go to no deal. Every sentence is variation on its up to London, he will simply change it to its all London’s fault. Barnier still had ambition two years ago but knows he’s finished now?
I sense Tusk keen to keep fighting to keep us in. But it’s not decision for commission, and I sense Germany and France have decided to let us fall out, so they can pick up the pieces and move on.
Merkel certainly has not, she does not want No Deal, Macron despite the early protests granted the extension last time
Merkel sighed a resigned sigh, turned to Barnier and actioned him to report back with the best that could be done to honour Good Friday agreement in a No Deal.
You still think they’ll agree to every request to go can kicking with us?
I think that the EU27 will do enough that No Deal only happens via a British decision.
OK, so just catching up, what's the PB consensus - is May's "separate the WA and PD from the MV" idea (so many acronyms) genius, insane, desperate or does it not matter either way cos it's not going to get voted through anyway?
The last - and a sign of desperation, and a displacement activity.
The thing is, if the margin of defeat is smaller than 149 then May will cling onto the hope that another vote, of some sort, will finally pass the thing. It's a Parliamentary version of Zeno's Paradox.
Given the lengths they have gone to getting round Bercow to MV3 (or 2.5 as R4 described it) I don't see any prospect of MV4. The only routes back from a third defeat are throwing it into Monday's IV2 process, or tying it to a referendum.
This article was post earlier, but for the wage slaves amongst us here is evidence not just of EU thinking how to rescue us after no deal, but Plenty of decisions for lame duck before trexit
39 billion decisions
It was agreed among the member states that for there to be any talks after the UK has crashed out, the bloc’s 27 capitals will expect Downing Street to agree to signal by 18 April that it will pay the £39bn Brexit bill despite the failure of the Commons to ratify the withdrawal agreement. Ambassadors agreed they would expect the UK to come back to the negotiating table “pretty soon with an ask to ensure the vital lines and procedures needed for the UK to survive”.
To me Barnier comes across as keen to go to no deal. Every sentence is variation on its up to London, he will simply change it to its all London’s fault. Barnier still had ambition two years ago but knows he’s finished now?
I sense Tusk keen to keep fighting to keep us in. But it’s not decision for commission, and I sense Germany and France have decided to let us fall out, so they can pick up the pieces and move on.
I think you make a valid point. France and Germany could see no deal as an opportunity for them to steal business and the city from London . They want to pick away our corpse. Especially the french
Well, they need a plan B then because that dog won't hunt
For those who replied to my article, I have just converted X GBP into EUR, where X is a four-figure. Much as I would like to say it was the product of considered thought, it was simply because my USD holdings are larger and it brought my EUR up to my USD. As for the person who suggested an investment ISA biased towards American companies, it's not a bad idea, I will look at it. To the person who suggested a Betfair bet on no-deal, in order to open a betting account I will have to get permission from my employers (I changed jobs recently and I have to run it past Compliance) and that is a slow process that might not be completed in time.
The investment consensus seems to be that the US is the most overvalued. But then the consensus is often wrong.
As long as we don't crash out accidentally, sterling will strengthen. So I am waiting to invest in overseas shares. Strong sterling will buy more.
I have been buying UK shares since last November. They are historically cheap and very attractive to overseas investors who can buy at weak sterling prices. As sterling strengthens the UK market rises in $ terms, I'll soon sell my UK shares before overseas investors cash in their profits.
This is all predicated on us not crashing out. If we crash out I won't invest at all but sit on my cash.
I am with you, and on the other wise of viewcode's trade. Both of us are gambling on no no deal. As you say.
I'm not trying to maximise my potential gains, I'm trying to minimise my potential losses. Which is why I'm on this side of the trade...
If soft Brexit is agreed, or there's a long extension, or even revocation, the £ will soar, and won't you lose out? Thanks.
Most of my liquid assets are in sterling, and all of my nonliquid ones. Since Brexit I've moved around 10% of my liquid assets into non-GBP as a cushion. I am more than happy to take the loss on the non-GBP assets as the GBP ones would overcompensate. I think I pointed this out before.
This article was post earlier, but for the wage slaves amongst us here is evidence not just of EU thinking how to rescue us after no deal, but Plenty of decisions for lame duck before trexit
39 billion decisions
It was agreed among the member states that for there to be any talks after the UK has crashed out, the bloc’s 27 capitals will expect Downing Street to agree to signal by 18 April that it will pay the £39bn Brexit bill despite the failure of the Commons to ratify the withdrawal agreement. Ambassadors agreed they would expect the UK to come back to the negotiating table “pretty soon with an ask to ensure the vital lines and procedures needed for the UK to survive”.
To me Barnier comes across as keen to go to no deal. Every sentence is variation on its up to London, he will simply change it to its all London’s fault. Barnier still had ambition two years ago but knows he’s finished now?
I sense Tusk keen to keep fighting to keep us in. But it’s not decision for commission, and I sense Germany and France have decided to let us fall out, so they can pick up the pieces and move on.
Merkel certainly has not, she does not want No Deal, Macron despite the early protests granted the extension last time
Merkel sighed a resigned sigh, turned to Barnier and actioned him to report back with the best that could be done to honour Good Friday agreement in a No Deal.
You still think they’ll agree to every request to go can kicking with us?
The best that can be done to honour the Good Friday Agreement in a No Deal is very, very bad, so yes, I think they'll kick the can. No harm in putting some pressure on the British to sort their shit out in the meantime though.
This article was post earlier, but for the wage slaves amongst us here is evidence not just of EU thinking how to rescue us after no deal, but Plenty of decisions for lame duck before trexit
39 billion decisions
It was agreed among the member states that for there to be any talks after the UK has crashed out, the bloc’s 27 capitals will expect Downing Street to agree to signal by 18 April that it will pay the £39bn Brexit bill despite the failure of the Commons to ratify the withdrawal agreement. Ambassadors agreed they would expect the UK to come back to the negotiating table “pretty soon with an ask to ensure the vital lines and procedures needed for the UK to survive”.
To me Barnier comes across as keen to go to no deal. Every sentence is variation on its up to London, he will simply change it to its all London’s fault. Barnier still had ambition two years ago but knows he’s finished now?
I sense Tusk keen to keep fighting to keep us in. But it’s not decision for commission, and I sense Germany and France have decided to let us fall out, so they can pick up the pieces and move on.
Merkel certainly has not, she does not want No Deal, Macron despite the early protests granted the extension last time
Merkel sighed a resigned sigh, turned to Barnier and actioned him to report back with the best that could be done to honour Good Friday agreement in a No Deal.
You still think they’ll agree to every request to go can kicking with us?
Well obviously the EU are prepared for No Deal that does not mean they want it and provided we agree to contest the EU Parliament elections as May would ask to do for a lengthy extension that would not be an issue, however as I said that could lead to a VONC and a Corbyn and SNP government following a general election and the UK shifting to a SM and CU BINO position anyway which would be a change of position the EU could more than work with and extend forever on
OK, so just catching up, what's the PB consensus - is May's "separate the WA and PD from the MV" idea (so many acronyms) genius, insane, desperate or does it not matter either way cos it's not going to get voted through anyway?
The latter, and IMO it's not so much an "idea" as a last resort to get out of Bercow's straightjacket.
Hearing Thomas's Welsh tones as Speaker brings back memories
Speaking of Bercow, I've always been ambivalent about him but last nite I had the greatest sympathy with his attempts to contain rude and unruly behaviour. Was that Christopher Chope chuntering away while Letwin was trying to speak? And who are the loudmouths who sit by the Speaker's chair and yelled like loutish soccer fans when Soubry was asked to speak?
The world has been watching these debates with great interest. It wasn't exactly an edifying spectacle last nite.
I lack sympathy for him on that regard because he indulges in it just as much as they do, and appears to take great pleasure in the opportunities to test out his new insults and put downs. I think he would be disappointed if they acted differently. He doesn't contribute to improving the tone of the debate, he helps set the tone.
Yeah, I can see that he kind of asks for it, but Chope repeatedly interrupting Letwin? The thugs grinning as they shouted down Soubry? This was Parliament's chance to show its mettle, to show it was up to the challenge?
How do you think it looked to the rest of the world?
I don't care how it looks to the rest of the world, some places are even worse with actual fistfights and the like. I very much don't like how parliamentarians conduct themselves generally, although a certain level of rowdy debate is not in itself a bad thing, and don't support the examples you provide, but it is not that Bercow asks for it, it is that I think he's a hypocrite in condemning it because he enjoys it so much. It doesn't make the behaviours of others ok, but it puts his own theatrics in context.
Nobody needs his theatrics put in context but on a special and serious occasion we had a right to expect better from our Parliamentarians.
This article was post earlier, but for the wage slaves amongst us here is evidence not just of EU thinking how to rescue us after no deal, but Plenty of decisions for lame duck before trexit
39 billion decisions
It was agreed among the member states that for there to be any talks after the UK has crashed out, the bloc’s 27 capitals will expect Downing Street to agree to signal by 18 April that it will pay the £39bn Brexit bill despite the failure of the Commons to ratify the withdrawal agreement. Ambassadors agreed they would expect the UK to come back to the negotiating table “pretty soon with an ask to ensure the vital lines and procedures needed for the UK to survive”.
To me Barnier comes across as keen to go to no deal. Every sentence is variation on its up to London, he will simply change it to its all London’s fault. Barnier still had ambition two years ago but knows he’s finished now?
I sense Tusk keen to keep fighting to keep us in. But it’s not decision for commission, and I sense Germany and France have decided to let us fall out, so they can pick up the pieces and move on.
Merkel certainly has not, she does not want No Deal, Macron despite the early protests granted the extension last time
Merkel sighed a resigned sigh, turned to Barnier and actioned him to report back with the best that could be done to honour Good Friday agreement in a No Deal.
You still think they’ll agree to every request to go can kicking with us?
I think that the EU27 will do enough that No Deal only happens via a British decision.
This article was post earlier, but for the wage slaves amongst us here is evidence not just of EU thinking how to rescue us after no deal, but Plenty of decisions for lame duck before trexit
39 billion decisions
It was agreed among the member states that for there to be any talks after the UK has crashed out, the bloc’s 27 capitals will expect Downing Street to agree to signal by 18 April that it will pay the £39bn Brexit bill despite the failure of the Commons to ratify the withdrawal agreement. Ambassadors agreed they would expect the UK to come back to the negotiating table “pretty soon with an ask to ensure the vital lines and procedures needed for the UK to survive”.
To me Barnier comes across as keen to go to no deal. Every sentence is variation on its up to London, he will simply change it to its all London’s fault. Barnier still had ambition two years ago but knows he’s finished now?
I sense Tusk keen to keep fighting to keep us in. But it’s not decision for commission, and I sense Germany and France have decided to let us fall out, so they can pick up the pieces and move on.
Merkel certainly has not, she does not want No Deal, Macron despite the early protests granted the extension last time
Unless something is passed that the EU will sign up to we are possibly left to being very close to two people only (probably) mattering. May and Macron.
1) Parliament is going to find it mighty difficult to legally force the Govt to do anything without No confidencing it AND replacing with another PM by April 12 that would revoke (so no conceivable Tory leader in that timeframe). Not impossible but not easy. Otherwise T May is in place come April 12.
A) She can revoke ( well possibly, the Supreme Court would probably end up having to rule if she could, given Gina Miller’s case was about only Parliament taking away rights so an Act was required to invoke A50, so on the one hand are rights being contravened by revoking or the more general point in this: if you needed to pass a law to invoke A50 don’t you need one to revoke it? Tough to pass by April 12.
B ) She can do nothing and the law of the land is we leave two weeks tomorrow. ( “I’m doing what 17.4m voted for as my final act etc etc”)
C) Macron ( probably him of the 27) says Ca suffit! No extension. A neat bookend to de Gaulle’s “non”., and the ERG sing the Marseillaise on Westminster Bridge.
OK, so just catching up, what's the PB consensus - is May's "separate the WA and PD from the MV" idea (so many acronyms) genius, insane, desperate or does it not matter either way cos it's not going to get voted through anyway?
The last - and a sign of desperation, and a displacement activity.
The thing is, if the margin of defeat is smaller than 149 then May will cling onto the hope that another vote, of some sort, will finally pass the thing. It's a Parliamentary version of Zeno's Paradox.
'You mean we only lost by 148?! So there's hope!!!!!!!'
Just a flesh wound Peter......
'We'll call it a draw. See you next Wednesday then?'
If as expected the WA fails tomorrow under what scenario is it even remotely possible we could still no deal exit, surely parliament will just approve second vote on Monday and TM will shrug her shoulders either way the Tory party is screwed
Are you serious. No deal is becoming very likely and no, the HOC will not just approve a second vote and that is it. Legislation is needed in just 14 days to stop no deal
She will just revoke when push comes to shove, but maybe not if she’s confident no deal will be less worse for the tories than revoke ?
She cannot just revoke. The HOC need to mandate it
I think she can. I don't think she should, but that's different.
Doesn't Miller apply? If you need Parliament to trigger A50, doesn't it follow to revoke?
OK, so just catching up, what's the PB consensus - is May's "separate the WA and PD from the MV" idea (so many acronyms) genius, insane, desperate or does it not matter either way cos it's not going to get voted through anyway?
The latter, and IMO it's not so much an "idea" as a last resort to get out of Bercow's straightjacket.
Hearing Thomas's Welsh tones as Speaker brings back memories
Speaking of Bercow, I've always been ambivalent about him but last nite I had the greatest sympathy with his attempts to contain rude and unruly behaviour. Was that Christopher Chope chuntering away while Letwin was trying to speak? And who are the loudmouths who sit by the Speaker's chair and yelled like loutish soccer fans when Soubry was asked to speak?
The world has been watching these debates with great interest. It wasn't exactly an edifying spectacle last nite.
I lack sympathy for him on that regard because he indulges in it just as much as they do, and appears to take great pleasure in the opportunities to test out his new insults and put downs. I think he would be disappointed if they acted differently. He doesn't contribute to improving the tone of the debate, he helps set the tone.
Yeah, I can see that he kind of asks for it, but Chope repeatedly interrupting Letwin? The thugs grinning as they shouted down Soubry? This was Parliament's chance to show its mettle, to show it was up to the challenge?
How do you think it looked to the rest of the world?
I don't care how it looks to the rest of the world, some places are even worse with actual fistfights and the like. I very much don't like how parliamentarians conduct themselves generally, although a certain level of rowdy debate is not in itself a bad thing, and don't support the examples you provide, but it is not that Bercow asks for it, it is that I think he's a hypocrite in condemning it because he enjoys it so much. It doesn't make the behaviours of others ok, but it puts his own theatrics in context.
Nobody needs his theatrics put in context but on a special and serious occasion we had a right to expect better from our Parliamentarians.
But you claimed you had sympathy for him because of their antics, which is entirely a separate point from expecting better from our parliamentarians. The latter is certainly justified, but I don't think the former is because he contributes to their behaviour, he is not really trying to contain the behaviour. If he was genuinely attempting to do so he would act better himself.
Just asked SPIN via their basic web chat whether they are putting up a spread on the vote tomorrow but the staff member replying didn’t know, essentially saying check in the morning when the politics trader is in.
They are very wary about politics spreads. I guess they've been duffed up a bit too often, mostly by site regulars here, I should think.
I don’t see any reason not to take the figures pretty much at face value. The various analyses of the data have strikingly shown very normal patterns.
1%ish so only 50,000 odd. I thought it’d be much more
And there is no suggestion that all or any of the 50,000 are illegitimate.
I don't understand your position anyway. I understand that you think people who would like to remain are wrong, misguided, stupid and for all i know evil and treacherous, but do you really think they don't exist or are so few that they can't gather 5m legitimate signatures?
I’d say they lacked empathy rather than any of those things. I don’t doubt they exist, I knew 16m voted to remain, and this petition is open to people who weren’t able to vote too. But I thought they’d try and game the numbers more than that.
Allegedly, if you have russian.troll@gmail as your email address, then russia.ntroll@gmail also redirects there, giving you 2(n-1) opportunities per email, where n is the number of non-. characters in your email local-part. I don't know whether the HoC petition-wranglers' figures account for this.
Just asked SPIN via their basic web chat whether they are putting up a spread on the vote tomorrow but the staff member replying didn’t know, essentially saying check in the morning when the politics trader is in.
They are very wary about politics spreads. I guess they've been duffed up a bit too often, mostly by site regulars here, I should think.
SPIN did very well at GE17 when very few thought the Tories would do so badly.
This article was post earlier, but for the wage slaves amongst us here is evidence not just of EU thinking how to rescue us after no deal, but Plenty of decisions for lame duck before trexit
so basically Barnier is shitting himself
To me Barnier comes across as keen to go to no deal. Every sentence is variation on its up to London, he will simply change it to its all London’s fault. Barnier still had ambition two years ago but knows he’s finished now?
I sense Tusk keen to keep fighting to keep us in. But it’s not decision for commission, and I sense Germany and France have decided to let us fall out, so they can pick up the pieces and move on.
Merkel certainly has not, she does not want No Deal, Macron despite the early protests granted the extension last time
Unless something is passed that the EU will sign up to we are possibly left to being very close to two people only (probably) mattering. May and Macron.
1) Parliament is going to find it mighty difficult to legally force the Govt to do anything without No confidencing it AND replacing with another PM by April 12 that would revoke (so no conceivable Tory leader in that timeframe). Not impossible but not easy. Otherwise T May is in place come April 12.
A) She can revoke ( well possibly, the Supreme Court would probably end up having to rule if she could, given Gina Miller’s case was about only Parliament taking away rights so an Act was required to invoke A50, so on the one hand are rights being contravened by revoking or the more general point in this: if you needed to pass a law to invoke A50 don’t you need one to revoke it? Tough to pass by April 12.
B ) She can do nothing and the law of the land is we leave two weeks tomorrow. ( “I’m doing what 17.4m voted for as my final act etc etc”)
C) Macron ( probably him of the 27) says Ca suffit! No extension. A neat bookend to de Gaulle’s “non”., and the ERG sing the Marseillaise on Westminster Bridge.
I'd say the processes are: a) threaten the government to make it do it, b) seize the agenda and make parliamentary time to do it from the opposition/backbenches, c) VONC the government and put a temporary one in place to do the job.
I am assuming and expecting civil servants already have a revocation bill drafted and sitting in a drawer. You are right that all of these need some time - but we are talking a few days at most. They can suspend SOs to sit through the night etc.
All of this assumes the government doesn't itself already intend to revoke in extremis.
Just asked SPIN via their basic web chat whether they are putting up a spread on the vote tomorrow but the staff member replying didn’t know, essentially saying check in the morning when the politics trader is in.
They are very wary about politics spreads. I guess they've been duffed up a bit too often, mostly by site regulars here, I should think.
They’ve done both MV (which were both sells I think, certainly the first was).
This article was post earlier, but for the wage slaves amongst us
It was agreed among the member states that for there to be any talks after the UK has crashed out, the bloc’s 27 capitals will expect Downing Street to agree to signal by 18 April that it will pay the £39bn Brexit bill despite the failure of the Commons to ratify the withdrawal agreement. Ambassadors agreed they would expect the UK to come back to the negotiating table “pretty soon with an ask to ensure the vital lines and procedures needed for the UK to survive”.
To me Barnier comes across as keen to go to no deal. Every sentence is variation on its up to London, he will simply change it to its all London’s fault. Barnier still had ambition two years ago but knows he’s finished now?
I sense Tusk keen to keep fighting to keep us in. But it’s not decision for commission, and I sense Germany and France have decided to let us fall out, so they can pick up the pieces and move on.
Merkel certainly has not, she does not want No Deal, Macron despite the early protests granted the extension last time
Merkel sighed a resigned sigh, turned to Barnier and actioned him to report back with the best that could be done to honour Good Friday agreement in a No Deal.
You still think they’ll agree to every request to go can kicking with us?
Well obviously the EU are prepared for No Deal that does not mean they want it and provided we agree to contest the EU Parliament elections as May would ask to do for a lengthy extension that would not be an issue, however as I said that could lead to a VONC and a Corbyn and SNP government following a general election and the UK shifting to a SM and CU BINO position anyway which would be a change of position the EU could more than work with and extend forever on
with so many in cabinet, government, above all in the Conservative Party membership and voter base unbothered if Brexit means a Clean Brexit, you think it will be straightforward for May or any replacement to go begging for long delay, pleading to be allowed to participate in EU elections and submit a plan B (if not obliged to by law).
I don’t think it’s immposible that happens, but I think it’s too unlikely on grounds of cabinet getting behind decision activists are against. If it comes to it I think it’s clean brexit rather than Tory PM begging for long delay.
It’s easy to see how Labour will take this gimmicky vote apart tomorrow.
Everyone knows what the government put in the PD. Now they have taken scissors to it, snipped that bit off and saying it’s changed now vote for it.
It’s political game playing. It’s a game of trying to pass the brexit blame. It’s sixth form standard even by the standard of May’s hapless business managers.
things have taken a darker turn the last few days. It’s not even entertaining anymore. If there were still bridges between government and DUP, tomorrow’s gimmick of trying to pin brexit on Labour burns those bridges down. If passed it stitches the DUP up with the backstop. It’s a tactic screaming government have given up trying to get the DUP on board. Is it not?
And if there was ever a chance of getting enough Labour MPs to make a difference, Mays resignation, prospect of harder Brexit PM and negotiation team, and the blanker the brexit cheque asking Labour MPs to sign up to has probably closed off that route for passing WA too.
Having said all that, Labour really do have to take this last chance to avoid the no deal exit. If they keep spurning these opportunities and the result is no deal exit, its the Labour Party that dies, not the Conservatives.
Both Labour and the Tories would see defections to TIG if No Deal.
TIG would probably win the next general election comfortably after the economic damage of No Deal on a SM and or CU BINO or rejoin the EU ticket and become the UK En Marche.
Indeed given Corbyn can only become PM with SNP support it may be the SNP who force the switch to SM and Customs Union BINO otherwise they will demand indyref2 if we are in a No Deal scenario and have a good chance of winning it in which case Corbyn loses power anyway
Good to see you talking no deal brexit HY after ruling it out up until now.
Remarkable the way HY swings from one wild prediction to another. It's just as well he doesn't gamble! Still, if TIG do "win the next GE comfortably" we read it here first,
Only in the event of No Deal would TIG I think win but No Deal would probably require a Boris or Raab government winning a snap general election after May's Deal fails, Corbyn cannot become PM without the SNP who will demand renegotiating with the EU BINO as the price of their support. So TIG would really be winning the general election after next
I shall be surprised if TIG manage to win a single seat at the next election.
I would be dubious of any of these reports from the EU that some would be happier with no deal .
These are the same theatrics before last weeks extension . As for Macron remember he is one of the most pro EU leaders around .
The UKs traumatic negotiations and current chaos is hardly a good advert to leave .
Quite. So why not amputate now?
Great example ( from his point of view) to allude to during the upcoming elections, and beyond that we are going to be a nightmare burden inside the EU for his vision of more Europe. Couldnt we veto the new budget for example? For him I can see all kinds of advantages to just getting rid now.
Just asked SPIN via their basic web chat whether they are putting up a spread on the vote tomorrow but the staff member replying didn’t know, essentially saying check in the morning when the politics trader is in.
They are very wary about politics spreads. I guess they've been duffed up a bit too often, mostly by site regulars here, I should think.
They’ve done both MV (which were both sells I think, certainly the first was).
Yes, I know. They seem to have one specialist trader and when he's not around, nobody will touch the topic.
This speech by Gerry Fitt is amusingly relevant about NI Unionist parties relationships with the main GB parties ! Do they say Thank you, do they heck.
If as expected the WA fails tomorrow under what scenario is it even remotely possible we could still no deal exit, surely parliament will just approve second vote on Monday and TM will shrug her shoulders either way the Tory party is screwed
Are you serious. No deal is becoming very likely and no, the HOC will not just approve a second vote and that is it. Legislation is needed in just 14 days to stop no deal
She will just revoke when push comes to shove, but maybe not if she’s confident no deal will be less worse for the tories than revoke ?
She cannot just revoke. The HOC need to mandate it
I think she can. I don't think she should, but that's different.
Doesn't Miller apply? If you need Parliament to trigger A50, doesn't it follow to revoke?
The Miller judgement was you need parliament to trigger A50 because you are taking away rights. Revoking wouldn't take away rights so it doesn't follow.
I would be dubious of any of these reports from the EU that some would be happier with no deal .
These are the same theatrics before last weeks extension . As for Macron remember he is one of the most pro EU leaders around .
The UKs traumatic negotiations and current chaos is hardly a good advert to leave .
Quite. So why not amputate now?
Great example ( from his point of view) to allude to during the upcoming elections, and beyond that we are going to be a nightmare burden inside the EU for his vision of more Europe. Couldnt we veto the new budget for example? For him I can see all kinds of advantages to just getting rid now.
Won’t happen . The EU won’t facilitate a no deal . It will have to be a UK decision . There will be tough words and grandstanding , any extension will have to be long but the EU won’t pull the plug .
If I were TM and the vote is lost tomorrow I would be very tempted immediately to Revoke, Resign, call a General Election, call for Referendums on a united Ireland and Scottish independence and leave the Conservative party.
OK, so just catching up, what's the PB consensus - is May's "separate the WA and PD from the MV" idea (so many acronyms) genius, insane, desperate or does it not matter either way cos it's not going to get voted through anyway?
The latter, and IMO it's not so much an "idea" as a last resort to get out of Bercow's straightjacket.
Hearing Thomas's Welsh tones as Speaker brings back memories
Speaking of Bercow, I've always been ambivalent about him but last nite I had the greatest sympathy with his attempts to contain rude and unruly behaviour. Was that Christopher Chope chuntering away while Letwin was trying to speak? And who are the loudmouths who sit by the Speaker's chair and yelled like loutish soccer fans when Soubry was asked to speak?
The world has been watching these debates with great interest. It wasn't exactly an edifying spectacle last nite.
I lack sympathy for him on that regard because he indulges in it just as much as they do, and appears to take great pleasure in the opportunities to test out his new insults and put downs. I think he would be disappointed if they acted differently. He doesn't contribute to improving the tone of the debate, he helps set the tone.
Yeah, I can see that he kind of asks for it, but Chope repeatedly interrupting Letwin? The thugs grinning as they shouted down Soubry? This was Parliament's chance to show its mettle, to show it was up to the challenge?
How do you think it looked to the rest of the world?
I don't cexampch. It doesn't make the behaviours of others ok, but it puts his own theatrics in context.
Nobody needs his theatrics put in context but on a special and serious occasion we had a right to expect better from our Parliamentarians.
But you claimed you had sympathy for him because of their antics, which is entirely a separate point from expecting better from our parliamentarians. The latter is certainly justified, but I don't think the former is because he contributes to their behaviour, he is not really trying to contain the behaviour. If he was genuinely attempting to do so he would act better himself.
Yes, I had sympathy with him for maybe the first time. If I'd been trying to control that rabble last nite I think i would have assaulted at least two members. Maybe he has encouraged it but just looking at last nite I couldn't help siding with the referee rather than the players, and wondered what other spectators must think of it all.
I don’t see any reason not to take the figures pretty much at face value. The various analyses of the data have strikingly shown very normal patterns.
1%ish so only 50,000 odd. I thought it’d be much more
And there is no suggestion that all or any of the 50,000 are illegitimate.
I don't understand your position anyway. I understand that you think people who would like to remain are wrong, misguided, stupid and for all i know evil and treacherous, but do you really think they don't exist or are so few that they can't gather 5m legitimate signatures?
I’d say they lacked empathy rather than any of those things. I don’t doubt they exist, I knew 16m voted to remain, and this petition is open to people who weren’t able to vote too. But I thought they’d try and game the numbers more than that.
Allegedly, if you have russian.troll@gmail as your email address, then russia.ntroll@gmail also redirects there, giving you 2(n-1) opportunities per email, where n is the number of non-. characters in your email local-part. I don't know whether the HoC petition-wranglers' figures account for this.
True, and well known, and you can put arbitrarily many extra dots in. I imagine whoever does the screening has the necessary grep fu to identify attempts to take advantage of this.
If as expected the WA fails tomorrow under what scenario is it even remotely possible we could still no deal exit, surely parliament will just approve second vote on Monday and TM will shrug her shoulders either way the Tory party is screwed
Are you serious. No deal is becoming very likely and no, the HOC will not just approve a second vote and that is it. Legislation is needed in just 14 days to stop no deal
She will just revoke when push comes to shove, but maybe not if she’s confident no deal will be less worse for the tories than revoke ?
She cannot just revoke. The HOC need to mandate it
I think she can. I don't think she should, but that's different.
Doesn't Miller apply? If you need Parliament to trigger A50, doesn't it follow to revoke?
The Miller judgement was you need parliament to trigger A50 because you are taking away rights. Revoking wouldn't take away rights so it doesn't follow.
The legal advice is mixed on that. You’re correct that revoking doesn’t remove rights and the Miller case was won because triggering Article 50 eventually leads to that but because MPs voted to trigger Article 50 they could also need to revoke it.
On extensions the law is clearer May can agree to any extension with the EU . If MPs refuse to agree the SI you end up with legal chaos but the UK is still in the EU under international law .
I don’t see any reason not to take the figures pretty much at face value. The various analyses of the data have strikingly shown very normal patterns.
1%ish so only 50,000 odd. I thought it’d be much more
And there is no suggestion that all or any of the 50,000 are illegitimate.
I don't understand your position anyway. I understand that you think people who would like to remain are wrong, misguided, stupid and for all i know evil and treacherous, but do you really think they don't exist or are so few that they can't gather 5m legitimate signatures?
I’d say they lacked empathy rather than any of those things. I don’t doubt they exist, I knew 16m voted to remain, and this petition is open to people who weren’t able to vote too. But I thought they’d try and game the numbers more than that.
Allegedly, if you have russian.troll@gmail as your email address, then russia.ntroll@gmail also redirects there, giving you 2(n-1) opportunities per email, where n is the number of non-. characters in your email local-part. I don't know whether the HoC petition-wranglers' figures account for this.
True, and well known, and you can put arbitrarily many extra dots in. I imagine whoever does the screening has the necessary grep fu to identify attempts to take advantage of this.
Is that 2 times (n-1) or to the power of?
You can also add a + and whatever characters you like afterwards.
It is useful for spam tracking, as you can use russian.troll+companyname@gmail.com
I thought the petition site had admitted they didn't check gmail addresses?
The tax deductible for nannies and waistcoat manufacturers are looking good kids.
Can you imagine his Budget speech?
“I have counted the nation’s farthings .....”
Bringing back the old money, at a conversion rate of one new-old farthing to one current penny, would be one way to inflate the apparent value of the pound. One new-old pound would be worth well in excess of ten Euros. It would also completely befuddled the elderly - again. What's not to like?
Parenthetically (and nothing to do with Ms Riley) I am sick unto death of people who use "Thanks" when they should have used "Please". She was making a request, not issuing a command.
Another annoying thing is when counter staff say "Are you alright" when they mean "Can I help you". And don't get me started on "reach out" which is exactly wrong. And as for the phrase "bring you along/forward" for "train you" it sets my teeth on edge.
Aaargh!
She said please. Thanks after the request works.
We will have to disagree. One should not sign off with "thanks" (or even worse, "thanks in advance"!) The addressee has the option to decline the request and should not feel compelled.
It’s just passive aggressive framing. Can be useful at times
It’s easy to see how Labour will take this gimmicky vote apart tomorrow.
Everyone knows what the government put in the PD. Now they have taken scissors to it, snipped that bit off and saying it’s changed now vote for it.
It’s political game playing. It’s a game of trying to pass the brexit blame. It’s sixth form standard even by the standard of May’s hapless business managers.
things have taken a darker turn the last few days. It’s not even entertaining anymore. If there were still bridges between government and DUP, tomorrow’s gimmick of trying to pin brexit on Labour burns those bridges down. If passed it stitches the DUP up with the backstop. It’s a tactic screaming government have given up trying to get the DUP on board. Is it not?
And if there was ever a chance of getting enough Labour MPs to make a difference, Mays resignation, prospect of harder Brexit PM and negotiation team, and the blanker the brexit cheque asking Labour MPs to sign up to has probably closed off that route for passing WA too.
Having said all that, Labour really do have to take this last chance to avoid the no deal exit. If they keep spurning these opportunities and the result is no deal exit, its the Labour Party that dies, not the Conservatives.
Both Labour and the Tories would see defections to TIG if No Deal.
TIG would probably win the next general election comfortably after the economic damage of No Deal on a SM and or CU BINO or rejoin the EU ticket and become the UK En Marche.
Indeed given Corbyn can only become PM with SNP support it may be the SNP who force the switch to SM and Customs Union BINO otherwise they will demand indyref2 if we are in a No Deal scenario and have a good chance of winning it in which case Corbyn loses power anyway
Good to see you talking no deal brexit HY after ruling it out up until now.
Rema,
Only in the event of No Deal would TIG I think win but No Deal would probably require a Boris or Raab government winning a snap general election after May's Deal fails, Corbyn cannot become PM without the SNP who will demand renegotiating with the EU BINO as the price of their support. So TIG would really be winning the general election after next
I shall be surprised if TIG manage to win a single seat at the next election.
I said the election after next, Chuka I think will hold his seat next time, maybe Mike Gapes and Wollaston too. The harder the Brexit and the more Labour sticks with Corbyn and the Tories pick a hardliner Brexiteer rightwinger to succeed May, the better for TIG
It’s easy to see how Labour will take this gimmicky vote apart tomorrow.
Everyone knows what the government put in the PD. Now they have taken scissors to it, snipped that bit off and saying it’s changed now vote for it.
snip snip snip Having said all that, Labour really do have to take this last chance to avoid the no deal exit. If they keep spurning these opportunities and the result is no deal exit, its the Labour Party that dies, not the Conservatives.
Both Labourway
Good to see you talking no deal brexit HY after ruling it out up until now.
Remarkable the way HY swings from one wild prediction to another. It's just as well he doesn't gamble! Still, if TIG do "win the next GE comfortably" we read it here first,
Only in the event of No Deal would TIG I think win but No Deal would probably require a Boris or Raab government winning a snap general election after May's Deal fails, Corbyn cannot become PM without the SNP who will demand renegotiating with the EU BINO as the price of their support. So TIG would really be winning the general election after next
Good luck to TIG getting 310 defections and getting every single MP re-elected in the 320 remainiest constituencies.
In the event of a Boris Tories v a Corbyn Labour it could eventually happen, remember En Marche went from nowhere to winning the French presidency and legislative elections in a year and the SDP were polling close to 50% in late 1981 when it was Thatcher v Foot and pre Falklands
A pound per defection to TIG under/over 200 before next GE and a pound per TIG seat won under/over 200 at next GE? I'm unders if you're overs. I'll give you a pound bonus every time TIG tops a UKPC pollster's poll before the next GE too. A pie and a pint from the winner for any jointly-approved long-term PBer acting as the escrow. You game?
OK, so just catching up, what's the PB consensus - is May's "separate the WA and PD from the MV" idea (so many acronyms) genius, insane, desperate or does it not matter either way cos it's not going to get voted through anyway?
The last - and a sign of desperation, and a displacement activity.
Blame game I suspect but not likely to be successful even with that limited objective.
I can’t work out what Theresa May does if, as now looks likely, Parliament coalesces around an option she has ruled out. She looks checkmated whatever she does.
If parliament coalesces around her deal, good for her.
If parliament coalesces around a referendum, we get a referendum without it being her fault which is good for her.
If parliament coalesces around a soft Brexit, it provides an incentive for hard Brexiteers to back a Deal/Remain referendum which is also good for her.
If I were TM and the vote is lost tomorrow I would be very tempted immediately to Revoke, Resign, call a General Election, call for Referendums on a united Ireland and Scottish independence and leave the Conservative party.
And do it all on the same day, preferably to coincide with European Parliament elections :-D
This article was post earlier, but for the wage slaves amongst us here is evidence not just of EU te vital lines and procedures needed for the UK to survive”.
To me Barnier comes ion two years ago but knows he’s finished now?
I sense Tusk keen to keep fighting to keep us in. But it’s not decision for commission, and I sense on.
Merkel certainly has not, she does not want No Deal, Macron despite the early protests granted the extension last time
Unless something is passed that the EU will sign up to we are possibly left to being very close to two people only (probably) mattering. May and Macron.
1) Parliament is going to find it mighty difficult to legally force the Govt to do anything without No confidencing it AND replacing with another PM by April 12 that would revoke (so no conceivable Tory leader in that timeframe). Not impossible but not easy. Otherwise T May is in place come April 12.
A) She can revoke ( well possibly, the Supreme Court would probably end up having to rule if she could, given Gina Miller’s case was about only Parliament taking away rights so an Act was required to invoke A50, so on the one hand are rights being contravened by revoking or the more general point in this: if you needed to pass a law to invoke A50 don’t you need one to revoke it? Tough to pass by April 12.
B ) She can do nothing and the law of the land is we leave two weeks tomorrow. ( “I’m doing what 17.4m voted for as my final act etc etc”)
C) Macron ( probably him of the 27) says Ca suffit! No extension. A neat bookend to de Gaulle’s “non”., and the ERG sing the Marseillaise on Westminster Bridge.
May has already made clear she will not revoke nor resign nor implement No Deal if her Deal fails again tomorrow but apply to contest the European elections and for a lengthy extension.
If as is possible the Commons has a majority for permanent CU on Monday even Macron has an indication of what the Commons would vote for and as the Telegraph reported last weekend May would also shift to back permanent CU as a last resort
It’s easy to see how Labour will take this gimmicky vote apart tomorrow.
Everyone knows what the government put in the PD. Now they have taken scissors to it, snipped that bit off and saying it’s changed now vote for it.
It’s political game playing. It’s a game of trying to pass the brexit blame. It’s sixth form standard even by the standard of May’s hapless business managers.
things have taken a darker turn the last few days. It’s not even entertaining anymore. If there were still bridges between government and DUP, tomorrow’s gimmick of trying to pin brexit on Labour burns those bridges down. If passed it stitches the DUP up with the backstop. It’s a tactic screaming government have given up trying to get the DUP on board. Is it not?
And if there was ever a chance of getting enough Labour MPs to make a difference, Mays resignation, prospect of harder Brexit PM and negotiation team, and the blanker the brexit cheque asking Labour MPs to sign up to has probably closed off that route for passing WA too.
Having said all that, Labour really do have to take this last chance to avoid the no deal exit. If they keep spurning these opportunities and the result is no deal exit, its the Labour Party that dies, not the Conservatives.
Both Labour and the Tories would see defections to TIG if No Deal.
Good to see you talking no deal brexit HY after ruling it out up until now.
Rema,
Only in the event of No Deal would TIG I think win but No Deal would probably require a Boris or Raab government winning a snap general election after May's Deal fails, Corbyn cannot become PM without the SNP who will demand renegotiating with the EU BINO as the price of their support. So TIG would really be winning the general election after next
I shall be surprised if TIG manage to win a single seat at the next election.
I said the election after next, Chuka I think will hold his seat next time, maybe Mike Gapes and Wollaston too. The harder the Brexit and the more Labour sticks with Corbyn and the Tories pick a hardliner Brexiteer rightwinger to succeed May, the better for TIG
Gapes is quite likely to stand down next time anyway having experienced poor health, and would be unlikely to survive at a general election. Wollaston and Allen might have some chance .I expect Labour to defeat Umunna.
This article was post earlier, but for the wage slaves amongst us
It was agreed among the member states that for there to be any talks after the UK has crashed out, the bloc’s 27 capitals will expect Downing Street to agree to signal by 18 April that it will pay the £39bn Brexit bill despite the failure of the Commons to ratify the withdrawal agreement. Ambassadors agreed they would expect the UK to come back to the negotiating table “pretty soon with an ask to ensure the vital lines and procedures needed for the UK to survive”.
To me Barnier comes across as keen to go to no deal. Every sentence is variation on its up to London, he will simply change it to its all London’s fault. Barnier still had ambition two years ago but knows he’s finished now?
I sense Tusk keen to keep fighting to keep us in. But it’s not decision for commission, and I sense Germany and France have decided to let us fall out, so they can pick up the pieces and move on.
Merkel certainly has not, she does not want No Deal, Macron despite the early protests granted the extension last time
Merkel sighed a resigned sigh, turned to Barnier and actioned him to report back with the best that could be done to honour Good Friday agreement in a No Deal.
You still think they’ll agree to every request to go can kicking with us?
Well obviously the EU are prepared for No Deal that does not mean they want it and provided we agree to contest the EU Parliament elections as May would ask to do for a lengthy extension that would
with so many in cabinet, government, above all in the Conservative Party membership and voter base unbothered if Brexit means a Clean Brexit, you think it will be straightforward for May or any replacement to go begging for long delay, pleading to be allowed to participate in EU elections and submit a plan B (if not obliged to by law).
I don’t think it’s immposible that happens, but I think it’s too unlikely on grounds of cabinet getting behind decision activists are against. If it comes to it I think it’s clean brexit rather than Tory PM begging for long delay.
May has made clear that is what she will do ie beg for a long delay, if she then loses a VONC the likely end result is a general election and a Corbyn and SNP BINO SM and CU government anyway
It’s easy to see how Labour will take this gimmicky vote apart tomorrow.
Everyone knows what the government put in the PD. Now they have taken scissors to it, snipped that bit off and saying it’s changed now vote for it.
It’s political game playing. It’s a game of trying to pass the brexit blame. It’s sixth form standard even by the standard of May’s hapless business managers.
things have taken a darker turn the last few days. It’s not even entertaining anymore. If there were still bridges between government and DUP, tomorrow’s gimmick of trying to pin brexit on Labour burns those bridges down. If passed it stitches the DUP up with the backstop. It’s a tactic screaming government have given up trying to get the DUP on board. Is it not?
And if there was ever a chance of getting enough Labour MPs to make a difference, Mays resignation, prospect of harder Brexit PM and negotiation team, and the blanker the brexit cheque asking Labour MPs to sign up to has probably closed off that route for passing WA too.
Having said all that, Labour really do have to take this last chance to avoid the no deal exit. If they keep spurning these opportunities and the result is no deal exit, its the Labour Party that dies, not the Conservatives.
Both Labour and the Tories would see defections to TIG if No Deal.
Good to see you talking no deal brexit HY after ruling it out up until now.
Rema,
Only in the event of No Deal woule winning the general election after next
I shall be surprised if TIG manage to win a single seat at the next election.
I said the election after next, Chuka I think will hold his seat next time, maybe Mike Gapes and Wollaston too. The harder the Brexit and the more Labour sticks with Corbyn and the Tories pick a hardliner Brexiteer rightwinger to succeed May, the better for TIG
Gapes is quite likely to stand down next time anyway having experienced poor health, and would be unlikely to survive at a general election. Wollaston and Allen might have some chance .I expect Labour to defeat Umunna.
Expect what you want, by late 1981 the SDP were polling 50% of the vote and a Boris v Corbyn contest as is possible would be very close to Thatcher v Foot then.
En Marche of course came from nowhere to win the French presidential and legislative elections as an alternative to an increasingly polarised right and left
It’s easy to see how Labour will take this gimmicky vote apart tomorrow.
Everyone knows what the government put in the PD. Now they have taken scissors to it, snipped that bit off and saying it’s changed now vote for it.
snip snip snip Having said all that, Labour really do have to take this last chance to avoid the no deal exit. If they keep spurning these opportunities and the result is no deal exit, its the Labour Party that dies, not the Conservatives.
Both Labourway
Good to see you talking no deal brexit HY after ruling it out up until now.
Remarkable the way HY swings from one wild prediction to another. It's just as well he doesn't gamble! Still, if TIG do "win the next GE comfortably" we read it here first,
Only in the event of No Deal would TIG I think win but No Deal would probably require a Boris or Raab government winning a snap general election after May's Deal fails, Corbyn cannot become PM without the SNP who will demand renegotiating with the EU BINO as the price of their support. So TIG would really be winning the general election after next
Good luck to TIG getting 310 defections and getting every single MP re-elected in the 320 remainiest constituencies.
In the event of a Boris Tories v a Corbyn Labour it could eventually happen, remember En Marche went from nowhere to winning the French presidency and legislative elections in a year and the SDP were polling close to 50% in late 1981 when it was Thatcher v Foot and pre Falklands
A pound per defection to TIG under/over 200 before next GE and a pound per TIG seat won under/over 200 at next GE? I'm unders if you're overs. I'll give you a pound bonus every time TIG tops a UKPC pollster's poll before the next GE too. A pie and a pint from the winner for any jointly-approved long-term PBer acting as the escrow. You game?
No, as I said election after next not next election and only if No Deal
It’s easy to see how Labour will take this gimmicky vote apart tomorrow.
o.
Having said all that, Labour really do have to take this last chance to avoid the no deal exit. If they keep spurning these opportunities and the result is no deal exit, its the Labour Party that dies, not the Conservatives.
Both Labour and the Tories would see defections to TIG if No Deal.
Good to see you talking no deal brexit HY after ruling it out up until now.
Rema,
Only in the event of No Deal woule winning the general election after next
I shall be surprised if TIG manage to win a single seat at the next election.
I said the election after next, Chuka I think will hold his seat next time, maybe Mike Gapes and Wollaston too. The harder the Brexit and the more Labour sticks with Corbyn and the Tories pick a hardliner Brexiteer rightwinger to succeed May, the better for TIG
Gapes is quite likely to stand down next time anyway having experienced poor health, and would be unlikely to survive at a general election. Wollaston and Allen might have some chance .I expect Labour to defeat Umunna.
Expect what you want, by late 1981 the SDP were polling 50% of the vote and a Boris v Corbyn contest as is possible would be very close to Thatcher v Foot then.
En Marche of course came from nowhere to win the French presidential and legislative elections as an alternative to an increasingly polarised right and left
Actually it was the Alliance polling 50% at the end of 1981 - ie Liberals plus SDP. In late March and April 1981 the SDP on its own had been recording over 30% in hypothetical polling surveys - no sign at all of TIG matching that.
It’s easy to see how Labour will take this gimmicky vote apart tomorrow.
o.
Having said all that, Labour really do have to take this last chance to avoid the no deal exit. If they keep spurning these opportunities and the result is no deal exit, its the Labour Party that dies, not the Conservatives.
Both Labour and the Tories would see defections to TIG if No Deal.
Good to see you talking no deal brexit HY after ruling it out up until now.
Rema,
Only in the event of No Deal woule winning the general election after next
I shall be surprised if TIG manage to win a single seat at the next election.
I said the election after next, Chuka I think will hold his seat next time, maybe Mike Gapes and Wollaston too. The harder the Brexit and the more Labour sticks with Corbyn and the Tories pick a hardliner Brexiteer rightwinger to succeed May, the better for TIG
Gapes is quite likely to stand down next time anyway having experienced poor health, and would be unlikely to survive at a general election. Wollaston and Allen might have some chance .I expect Labour to defeat Umunna.
Expect what you want, by late 1981 the SDP were polling 50% of the vote and a Boris v Corbyn contest as is possible would be very close to Thatcher v Foot then.
En Marche of course came from nowhere to win the French presidential and legislative elections as an alternative to an increasingly polarised right and left
Actually it was the Alliance polling 50% at the end of 1981 - ie Liberals plus SDP. In late March and April 1981 the SDP on its own had been recording over 30% in hypothetical polling surveys - no sign at all of TIG matching that.
We are still in the EU and May, not Boris, is still Tory leader.
Comments
If we choose No Deal they are prepared for it but they know there is a majority in the Commons against No Deal
As for Wilson, I wouldn't call the 1964-70 Government socialist - technocratic certainly and social democratic in many respects. Had the relations with the Unions been solved via In Place of Strife, it might have set a Government pattern for the 70s and beyond.
The returning Wilson/Callaghan Government faced huge problems - I do think the Lib/Lab Pact achieved a lot bringing down inflation and unemployment during its life - but the battle for Labour's soul was being won by Militant and the journey of Jenkins and the moderates to the SDP had already begun by 1979. Had Callaghan gone to the country in the autumn of 1978 he might have won though I think another Hung Parliament more likely.
My guess is that her senior colleagues would tell her to revoke and resign, if push came to shove, but in practice I doubt it would come to that.
Things are similar now: the 79-2010ish neoliberal consensus (low tax, central bank independence, free movement) has died and we are still unsure what to replace it with. The number of democracies worldwide is falling and freedom is restricted: witness China's appalling social credit system. I don't know what will replace the neoliberal consensus but I suspect I will neither like nor approve of it.
The alternative seems to be to go to No Deal on 12/4 and basically see what happens. I doubt the sky will fall in but it may not be very easy canvassing for the Government between than and May 2nd.
It is almost impressive the MPs don't just give up and vote for the WA, on the basis that it at last, finally, ends this current phase at least. But of course that's why they cannot give up, ever. Once we're out despite the confidence of many rejoiners, it might be it. They cannot give in now. And the DUP are just stubborn and cannot see past the whip handle they are holding over the Tories, and the ERG are just DUP proxies at this point.
Sure there is hit for EU from No Brexit, but this is offset by other concerns now, signs EU politically shop tired, wanting to go back to dealing with other important things. EU signalling reputational damage for themselves if they kick resolution down road, to prolong uncertainty will inflict more economic woe upon already creaking economies and business. With continued farce in Westminster (which they to an extent set up for us) EU are right to assure themselves Britain will get bulk of blame for any Brexit pain, this creates optimal moment for EU to let No Deal happen. Reinforcing this optimal moment is EU not wanting us in those EU elections, don’t underestimate this argument, of damage to their project from UK continuing to participate in EU democracy without being around to abide those decisions, this contention could snowball in Europe in coming weeks giving perfect cover to exclude us.
Are you listening HY
Has this been covered yet?
"Three arrested in Labour anti-Semitism probe"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47734704
"The investigation was launched after radio station LBC obtained a leaked Labour dossier detailing anti-Semitic social media messages allegedly posted by party members."
I am also very worried about it.
I don't understand your position anyway. I understand that you think people who would like to remain are wrong, misguided, stupid and for all i know evil and treacherous, but do you really think they don't exist or are so few that they can't gather 5m legitimate signatures?
"Zugzwang (German for "compulsion to move", pronounced [ˈtsuːktsvaŋ]) is a situation found in chess and other games wherein one player is put at a disadvantage because they must make a move when they would prefer to pass and not move. The fact that the player is compelled to move means that their position will become significantly weaker. A player is said to be "in zugzwang" when any possible move will worsen their position."
We have very little goodwill in Europe and why should we be surprised
What the EU really want of course is for us to stay, for euroscepticism to be expunged for good and for us to embrace the central project.
But, failing that, the £10bn a year, stabilising the EU politically and economically and showing Leaving to be a forlorn hope will do, and they can hold our their hopes for another day.
Did you order that after someone slagged off Jeremy Thorpe at the time?
I cannot see the government surviving No Deal either, enough Tory Remain and BINO diehards would abstain or VONC the government to force a general election but May has made clear she is not going to pursue No Deal anyway unless the Commons votes for it, she will go for long extension and contest the European elections
https://order-order.com/2019/03/28/diane-abbott-launched-report-notorious-conspiracist-defended-ken-livingstones-zionist-hitler-theories/
Being a one-track record is tedious and boring, not persuasive.
There are still some neoliberals in power, Macron for example (Turnbull until a few months ago), however the biggest growth in politics is the rise of the populist right, Salvini, Le Pen, Vox, Boris and Brexit, Trump etc and the populist Left, Corbyn, Melenchon, Sanders, Podemos etc.
We should still remember we are still far more democratic than we were even in the 1970s when most of Eastern Europe, China, Russia, Latin America, even Spain and Greece were dictatorships
You still think they’ll agree to every request to go can kicking with us?
https://capx.co/what-theresa-may-got-wrong/
1) Parliament is going to find it mighty difficult to legally force the Govt to do anything without No confidencing it AND replacing with another PM by April 12 that would revoke (so no conceivable Tory leader in that timeframe). Not impossible but not easy. Otherwise T May is in place come April 12.
A) She can revoke ( well possibly, the Supreme Court would probably end up having to rule if she could, given Gina Miller’s case was about only Parliament taking away rights so an Act was required to invoke A50, so on the one hand are rights being contravened by revoking or the more general point in this: if you needed to pass a law to invoke A50 don’t you need one to revoke it? Tough to pass by April 12.
B ) She can do nothing and the law of the land is we leave two weeks tomorrow. ( “I’m doing what 17.4m voted for as my final act etc etc”)
C) Macron ( probably him of the 27) says Ca suffit! No extension. A neat bookend to de Gaulle’s “non”., and the ERG sing the Marseillaise on Westminster Bridge.
I am assuming and expecting civil servants already have a revocation bill drafted and sitting in a drawer. You are right that all of these need some time - but we are talking a few days at most. They can suspend SOs to sit through the night etc.
All of this assumes the government doesn't itself already intend to revoke in extremis.
“I have counted the nation’s farthings .....”
I don’t think it’s immposible that happens, but I think it’s too unlikely on grounds of cabinet getting behind decision activists are against. If it comes to it I think it’s clean brexit rather than Tory PM begging for long delay.
These are the same theatrics before last weeks extension . As for Macron remember he is one of the most pro EU leaders around .
The UKs traumatic negotiations and current chaos is hardly a good advert to leave .
Meanwhile there is a flood in Tory Shit BREXIT land
Great example ( from his point of view) to allude to during the upcoming elections, and beyond that we are going to be a nightmare burden inside the EU for his vision of more Europe. Couldnt we veto the new budget for example? For him I can see all kinds of advantages to just getting rid now.
Maybe it's Mike, moonlighting.
Do they say Thank you, do they heck.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LS37SNYjg8w
Is that 2 times (n-1) or to the power of?
On extensions the law is clearer May can agree to any extension with the EU . If MPs refuse to agree the SI you end up with legal chaos but the UK is still in the EU under international law .
It is useful for spam tracking, as you can use russian.troll+companyname@gmail.com
I thought the petition site had admitted they didn't check gmail addresses?
NEW THREAD
If as is possible the Commons has a majority for permanent CU on Monday even Macron has an indication of what the Commons would vote for and as the Telegraph reported last weekend May would also shift to back permanent CU as a last resort
En Marche of course came from nowhere to win the French presidential and legislative elections as an alternative to an increasingly polarised right and left