So the ultras have no escape from the backstop, other than bankrupting the country?
I’m defence of the ultras, May committed two massive blunders (see Varafoukis upthread) in exercising A50 and agreeing to the sequencing.
It was strategic incompetence at a grand scale.
Some posters may have noted this at the time.
May didn't have any real choice on either Article 50 or the sequencing, once the EU had decided their demands. The terms of our future relationship with the EU were always going to be set by them, and not to our advantage. She could have been more honest with the public about the compromises that Brexit forces on us and tried to get a consensus around those compromises.
Triggering Article 50 before we had a plan or even a destination in mind was a epic balls-up by Theresa May. Even if it is true (and it was never tested) that the EU would not concede on its rules for sequencing the negotiations, there was no point in even starting before we had decided what we wanted, what we were negotiating for.
Agreed. However the plan wasn't something clever civil servants could cobble together in a couple of weeks. Brexit entails severe compromises with a lot of potential damage to be mitigated. The need was to get parties on board with the compromises.
As we know, David Cameron prevented the civil service planning for Brexit.
Vote Leave and the Brexit gang has no plan.
May came to office with no plan and her first few months were wasted rhetorically alienating Remainers. She had a narrow opportunity to set the broad terms of Brexit and she flunked it.
Peston pushing the no deal line again . Apparently a few close to May say she’ll go for no deal on April 12 th .
Are these the same few who also said the same about March 29 . Another apparent leak designed to try and frighten Labour and others into voting for her WA.
You should be more worried about the EU triggering No Deal. It's one of the biggest delusions (in a crowded field) in the Brexit saga that Britain controls its destiny in the ratification process and that the EU will give us as long as we want.
I'm surprised Survation took the tables down - I thought as members of the BPC they were bound to publish them if the results had been made (selectively) public.
Anyway, someone got them before they were removed:
It wont be a year. It'll be never. Unless they agree it today. They suspect they suspect the same which us why they wont.
I agree. It’s done after today, Brexit is dead. Every day further away from the referendum is day in which its authority diminishes and the call for a referendum becomes even stronger. Parliament and the establishment get what they want, because some brexiteers can’t comprehend patience and compromise.
Annual OAG 'busiest routes' report - no surprises - dominated by Asia. In Europe nine out of the top ten busiest long haul routes go into Heathrow. CDG-JFK is at number 8, with about a third of the number of flights LHR-JFK.
This is a deal that only a Nation defeated at war signs.
A silly way to look at it given a very large chunk of those who dont want to sign it want to sign something even softer or remerge with the enemy in your metaphor.
The danger is that holding the Euro Elections in this country would be a fest for populists.
If things do get to that point then I wouldn't want to even attempt to guess the overall result. It's not inconceivable, for example, that a fanatically pro-EU slate could emerge from the ether and win a slew of seats.
On the other hand, I'm rather less concerned about the prospect of Nigel Farage being re-elected than I am about Mr Yaxley-Lennon and 15 or 20 of his closest friends being let loose in the European Parliament. If you thought that our reputation couldn't sink any lower in that particular forum, think again.
We sent Nick Griffin and Andrew Brons to the European Parliament just two elections ago. I really doubt there would be 15-20 Yaxley-Lennonites sent, unless Farage's Brexit Party adopts them wholesale.
Just put my Mother in Law's bungalow up for sale to fund her move into a Nursing Home. She does have mild dementia, but mostly it is physical frailty. She cannot manage even with maximum domestic support.
I have no problem with this at all, after all she saved for a rainy day and now it is pissing down.
My mother-in-law moved in with us in January. She can no longer look after herself and would very quickly fade away in a home. It has been incredibly stressful for my wife and continues to be, but ultimately we are fortunate enough to have the luxury of choice. So many others don’t. That cannot be right.
I don’t understand. What lack of choice are you implying others don’t have? If your mother in law had no assets she would have her care fully paid for by the adult services department at your local council.
Apparently IDS ruled himself out of running in any future leadership contest, we will all be relieved to hear...
The worst Prime Minister we never had.
IDS and Corbyn have shown beyond all doubt the old adage that bad Opposition makes for bad Government. Part of the reason I think that May has stuck to her plan of continually going back to the ERG/DUP has been the lack of an alternative approach genuinely available from the Labour leadership. IDS’s failure of course was giving Blair a free plays on Iraq.
Conclusion: Labour MPs are enjoying the current chaos caused by the PM having to run everything by them and beg for their votes, and want it to continue indefinitely. Not sure I can entirely blame them.
The danger is that holding the Euro Elections in this country would be a fest for populists.
If things do get to that point then I wouldn't want to even attempt to guess the overall result. It's not inconceivable, for example, that a fanatically pro-EU slate could emerge from the ether and win a slew of seats.
On the other hand, I'm rather less concerned about the prospect of Nigel Farage being re-elected than I am about Mr Yaxley-Lennon and 15 or 20 of his closest friends being let loose in the European Parliament. If you thought that our reputation couldn't sink any lower in that particular forum, think again.
We sent Nick Griffin and Andrew Brons to the European Parliament just two elections ago. I really doubt there would be 15-20 Yaxley-Lennonites sent, unless Farage's Brexit Party adopts them wholesale.
I genuinely think it is possible that Euro elections could see a turnout figures sub 20% or even lower.
Apparently IDS ruled himself out of running in any future leadership contest, we will all be relieved to hear...
The worst Prime Minister we never had.
IDS and Corbyn have shown beyond all doubt the old adage that bad Opposition makes for bad Government. Part of the reason I think that May has stuck to her plan of continually going back to the ERG/DUP has been the lack of an alternative approach genuinely available from the Labour leadership. IDS’s failure of course was giving Blair a free plays on Iraq.
The two most popular options in Parliament come from Labour's portfolio - Customs Union and confirmatory referendum. All May has to do is adopt one or both of these and she'll be home and hosed.
Just put my Mother in Law's bungalow up for sale to fund her move into a Nursing Home. She does have mild dementia, but mostly it is physical frailty. She cannot manage even with maximum domestic support.
I have no problem with this at all, after all she saved for a rainy day and now it is pissing down.
My mother-in-law moved in with us in January. She can no longer look after herself and would very quickly fade away in a home. It has been incredibly stressful for my wife and continues to be, but ultimately we are fortunate enough to have the luxury of choice. So many others don’t. That cannot be right.
I don’t understand. What lack of choice are you implying others don’t have? If your mother in law had no assets she would have her care fully paid for by the adult services department at your local council.
I think he means they had the choice of keeping her out of a home as long as possible?
Apparently IDS ruled himself out of running in any future leadership contest, we will all be relieved to hear...
The worst Prime Minister we never had.
IDS and Corbyn have shown beyond all doubt the old adage that bad Opposition makes for bad Government. Part of the reason I think that May has stuck to her plan of continually going back to the ERG/DUP has been the lack of an alternative approach genuinely available from the Labour leadership. IDS’s failure of course was giving Blair a free plays on Iraq.
The two most popular options in Parliament come from Labour's portfolio - Customs Union and confirmatory referendum. All May has to do is adopt one or both of these and she'll be home and hosed.
Labour were latecomers to the party, on the second of those for sure.
The danger is that holding the Euro Elections in this country would be a fest for populists.
If things do get to that point then I wouldn't want to even attempt to guess the overall result. It's not inconceivable, for example, that a fanatically pro-EU slate could emerge from the ether and win a slew of seats.
On the other hand, I'm rather less concerned about the prospect of Nigel Farage being re-elected than I am about Mr Yaxley-Lennon and 15 or 20 of his closest friends being let loose in the European Parliament. If you thought that our reputation couldn't sink any lower in that particular forum, think again.
We sent Nick Griffin and Andrew Brons to the European Parliament just two elections ago. I really doubt there would be 15-20 Yaxley-Lennonites sent, unless Farage's Brexit Party adopts them wholesale.
I genuinely think it is possible that Euro elections could see a turnout figures sub 20% or even lower.
If that motion passes and I expect May would not be too concerned about it that could well see the Withdrawal Agreement over the line today as ERG opposition to it collapses and it gets more Labour MPs switching to back it even if the DUP remain opposed
On IT generally, scrap it and simply treat as income. However the beneficiary should be allowed to add it to their pension pot.
Not much help when you are limited to one million pension pot
How many people under 40 are ever going to have £1mn in their pension pot?
In the discussion it was leaving a 3 million property which was suggested could be put in a pension pot , but given the restrictions today where they rob pension pots that would not help.
'Okay lads, we're scraping the bottom of the barrel of tired, old repeated memes; the EU has blinked is exhausted, the Paddies are shitting themselves is done, DEPLOY THE ROYAL YACHT!'
SCons tweeting beforehand that it was a two horse race between them and SLab. If you can have two horse races for second, that's certainly those lads' foreseeable future.
They were also tweeting that the "car park tax" was going to increase terror attacks on the police so who knows how the mind of a ScotTory works.
Parliament having high involvement has not been a triumph but if it saw the thing pass it should be agreed. But how many beyond the signatories would back it from labour ranks? 5? 10?
The danger is that holding the Euro Elections in this country would be a fest for populists.
If things do get to that point then I wouldn't want to even attempt to guess the overall result. It's not inconceivable, for example, that a fanatically pro-EU slate could emerge from the ether and win a slew of seats.
On the other hand, I'm rather less concerned about the prospect of Nigel Farage being re-elected than I am about Mr Yaxley-Lennon and 15 or 20 of his closest friends being let loose in the European Parliament. If you thought that our reputation couldn't sink any lower in that particular forum, think again.
We sent Nick Griffin and Andrew Brons to the European Parliament just two elections ago. I really doubt there would be 15-20 Yaxley-Lennonites sent, unless Farage's Brexit Party adopts them wholesale.
I genuinely think it is possible that Euro elections could see a turnout figures sub 20% or even lower.
Despite all the extra publicity?
They will surely be marketed by both sides as a proxy for a 2nd ref vote?
Govt might support this amendment? Can’t see why not.
Pass this, then have an election, where the Manifesto sets out the deal you want to try to achieve - get a majority - then bin the oversight. A new Tory leader could harldy object to that scenario......
If that motion passes and I expect May would not be too concerned about it that could well see the Withdrawal Agreement over the line today as ERG opposition to it collapses and it gets more Labour MPs switching to back it even if the DUP remain opposed
If it passes it could give rise to familiar difficulties in a hung parliament. Incentive therefore to go to the country before future relationship is negotiated.
Dr. Foxy, if reports are accurate the EU, should we leave with no deal, would refuse to even negotiate unless we endorsed the backstop, which includes entering a customs union. That's entirely unreasonable, given the backstop is apparently a short term stopgap measure until a long term alternative can be found.
My sympathies on your mother-in-law's situation.
Edited extra bit: and to Mr. Observer on his, of course.
We have soveriegnty, which means that we can choose, but it doesn't mean we can impose our choices on other sovereign countries!
If we want to have WTO terms with the EU, we can choose those, but do need to accept that choices have consequences.
Thanks for your sympathies about my MiL. She is a lovely old lady, even now.
If that motion passes and I expect May would not be too concerned about it that could well see the Withdrawal Agreement over the line today as ERG opposition to it collapses and it gets more Labour MPs switching to back it even if the DUP remain opposed
This would be a way to tie the hands of Boris / Raab, so could gain some Labour lose some of the ERG who have swung behind.
She needs someone behind the scenes talking to Labour and saying this and that it would be a would force a hard Brexit Tory pm to call an election., which is what a Labour want.
Conclusion: Labour MPs are enjoying the current chaos caused by the PM having to run everything by them and beg for their votes, and want it to continue indefinitely. Not sure I can entirely blame them.
If that motion passes and I expect May would not be too concerned about it that could well see the Withdrawal Agreement over the line today as ERG opposition to it collapses and it gets more Labour MPs switching to back it even if the DUP remain opposed
Labour has to be careful. If the Tories DO largely unite behind the Govt. motion, then the headlines tomorrow will be "Labour MPs block Brexit on Brexit Day." Some might like that as a badge of courage to wear. But a tidy number might not....
"With the benefit of 20/20 hindsight though, somehow committing the Brexiteers to a written plan before the vote might have avoided much of this chaos."
An interesting suggestion for future referendums. For Indyref2, the SNP would need to explain carefully how 300 years of shared history could be disentangled before putting it forward.
In any case, it would be a task for the CS if it is to have any credibility. Why didn't they do it for Brexit? Oh, yes, Remainer Cameron stopped them. After all, he didn't want them giving Brexit credibility.
The ERG are blamed for this impasse, but if they all voted for May's deal, the numbers don't add up if the DUP are against. The Tory remainers, the SNP, the LDs and finally most of the Labour party, including those who pledged to honour the referendum result, would see to that.
My own MP, from a constituency with a 25,000 Labour majority and a 58% Leave vote, has consistently voted against any deal, and recently voted to revoke, despite voting to honour the result. Fairly normal behaviour for a honourable member of Parliament.
Parliament having high involvement has not been a triumph but if it saw the thing pass it should be agreed. But how many beyond the signatories would back it from labour ranks? 5? 10?
They need 30+
No, they need about 17 to 20 given the DUP opposition I think given Tory rebels will collapse to just 10 to 15 tonight and SF will not take their seats
Govt should whip to support, it's the only way they're winning today
Only way it has a chance. But they'll see it as giving up control. Which it is, but they're losing that on Monday anyway if this doesn't pass.
But I have a vision - if there us a rumour the gov would back the amendment the Tories whi come on board since MV2 will claim it's an outrage and refuse to back the deal
I'm surprised Survation took the tables down - I thought as members of the BPC they were bound to publish them if the results had been made (selectively) public.
Anyway, someone got them before they were removed:
If that motion passes and I expect May would not be too concerned about it that could well see the Withdrawal Agreement over the line today as ERG opposition to it collapses and it gets more Labour MPs switching to back it even if the DUP remain opposed
If it passes it could give rise to familiar difficulties in a hung parliament. Incentive therefore to go to the country before future relationship is negotiated.
That would be for a new Tory leader but GE could be inevitable as DUP will back a VONC if the Deal passes today
If that motion passes and I expect May would not be too concerned about it that could well see the Withdrawal Agreement over the line today as ERG opposition to it collapses and it gets more Labour MPs switching to back it even if the DUP remain opposed
Labour has to be careful. If the Tories DO largely unite behind the Govt. motion, then the headlines tomorrow will be "Labour MPs block Brexit on Brexit Day." Some might like that as a badge of courage to wear. But a tidy number might not....
The Anti Democratic League aka TIG would love to wear that badge
My favourite thing about Brexit: the Musical is just how long-running some of the characters are.
Claude Montfitchet has been playing Jeremy Corbyn for - what - nearly 40 years? It still gives me a chuckle that in real life he owns the entire county of Westmorland.
If that motion passes and I expect May would not be too concerned about it that could well see the Withdrawal Agreement over the line today as ERG opposition to it collapses and it gets more Labour MPs switching to back it even if the DUP remain opposed
If it passes it could give rise to familiar difficulties in a hung parliament. Incentive therefore to go to the country before future relationship is negotiated.
There is also the matter of re-set of the timeframe of parliment. You really want one government negoiating this, not another one to potentially come in the middle of it and messing up all which has gone before.
If that motion passes and I expect May would not be too concerned about it that could well see the Withdrawal Agreement over the line today as ERG opposition to it collapses and it gets more Labour MPs switching to back it even if the DUP remain opposed
This would be a way to tie the hands of Boris / Raab, so could gain some Labour lose some of the ERG who have swung behind.
She needs someone behind the scenes talking to Labour and saying this and that it would be a would force a hard Brexit Tory pm to call an election., which is what a Labour want.
Not really as the PD is not being voted on today anyway only the WA and the motion relates to the PD
If that motion passes and I expect May would not be too concerned about it that could well see the Withdrawal Agreement over the line today as ERG opposition to it collapses and it gets more Labour MPs switching to back it even if the DUP remain opposed
Labour has to be careful. If the Tories DO largely unite behind the Govt. motion, then the headlines tomorrow will be "Labour MPs block Brexit on Brexit Day." Some might like that as a badge of courage to wear. But a tidy number might not....
The Anti Democratic League aka TIG would love to wear that badge
There is a big risk for Labour as their voters are split. They have half the most leave supporting areas and three quarters of the most Brexit-y. May is trying to make them move one way or the other.
Parliament having high involvement has not been a triumph but if it saw the thing pass it should be agreed. But how many beyond the signatories would back it from labour ranks? 5? 10?
They need 30+
No, they need about 17 to 20 given the DUP opposition I think given Tory rebels will collapse to just 10 to 15 tonight and SF will not take their seats
And you think they can get that many? And that no Tories dont support on the basis they prefer the indicative votes?
"With the benefit of 20/20 hindsight though, somehow committing the Brexiteers to a written plan before the vote might have avoided much of this chaos."
An interesting suggestion for future referendums. For Indyref2, the SNP would need to explain carefully how 300 years of shared history could be disentangled before putting it forward.
In any case, it would be a task for the CS if it is to have any credibility. Why didn't they do it for Brexit? Oh, yes, Remainer Cameron stopped them. After all, he didn't want them giving Brexit credibility.
The ERG are blamed for this impasse, but if they all voted for May's deal, the numbers don't add up if the DUP are against. The Tory remainers, the SNP, the LDs and finally most of the Labour party, including those who pledged to honour the referendum result, would see to that.
My own MP, from a constituency with a 25,000 Labour majority and a 58% Leave vote, has consistently voted against any deal, and recently voted to revoke, despite voting to honour the result. Fairly normal behaviour for a honourable member of Parliament.
The large Tory opposition to the deal has given Labour MPs cover to oppose it (“if even Tory Brexit supporters don’t like it...”). I’m not sure DUP opposition would have been enough against an almost united Tory Party, especially one actively promoting the deal. And of course there was the bonus of the DUP threatening to bring down the Govt after it passed.
If that motion passes and I expect May would not be too concerned about it that could well see the Withdrawal Agreement over the line today as ERG opposition to it collapses and it gets more Labour MPs switching to back it even if the DUP remain opposed
Labour has to be careful. If the Tories DO largely unite behind the Govt. motion, then the headlines tomorrow will be "Labour MPs block Brexit on Brexit Day." Some might like that as a badge of courage to wear. But a tidy number might not....
The Anti Democratic League aka TIG would love to wear that badge
There is a big risk for Labour as their voters are split. They have half the most leave supporting areas and three quarters of the most Brexit-y. May is trying to make them move one way or the other.
SCons tweeting beforehand that it was a two horse race between them and SLab. If you can have two horse races for second, that's certainly those lads' foreseeable future.
They were also tweeting that the "car park tax" was going to increase terror attacks on the police so who knows how the mind of a ScotTory works.
You only need to witness the twisted bitterness of Scottish Tories on here, they can only wish ill on Scotland no matter how evil or bad it is, tells you the caliber of them.
If that motion passes and I expect May would not be too concerned about it that could well see the Withdrawal Agreement over the line today as ERG opposition to it collapses and it gets more Labour MPs switching to back it even if the DUP remain opposed
Labour has to be careful. If the Tories DO largely unite behind the Govt. motion, then the headlines tomorrow will be "Labour MPs block Brexit on Brexit Day." Some might like that as a badge of courage to wear. But a tidy number might not....
The Anti Democratic League aka TIG would love to wear that badge
There is a big risk for Labour as their voters are split. They have half the most leave supporting areas and three quarters of the most Brexit-y. May is trying to make them move one way or the other.
I know that’s MPs are supposed to represent all of their constituents, but if the leave voters in Labour seats are mostly non Labour supporters, it doesn’t matter so much does it?
Just to make sure I have understood this correctly: a) Am I right in saying there is no real expectation of this passing today or have I missed something? b) If a) is true why do it? Is it just desperation i.e. might as well have a go, nothing to lose except reputation. c) Is removing the PD really a substantial change? If so I don't understand why.
Theoretical scenario to consider: MPs pass deal today against DUP opposition with assistance of Labour rebels. It will still require legislation to become law.
'Okay lads, we're scraping the bottom of the barrel of tired, old repeated memes; the EU has blinked is exhausted, the Paddies are shitting themselves is done, DEPLOY THE ROYAL YACHT!'
Oh wow. When cornered, Mogg starts having a go at the BBC in a Trump style load of crap.
I remember when Eton's patriarchs were interested in the country and the wider good.
Wow, you have a good memory. The place should be burned to the ground, for the good of the country.
Cultural vandalism - there are some beautiful buildings there
(People often make a category error though. Eton’s “patriarchs’”interest in the country and the wider good derived from who and what they were, not the fact that they were OEs. Not all OEs have the same sense of duty that the “patriarchs” do)
Well turn it into a Comprehensive then. To be honest, that would probably upset JRM more than the arson option anyway.
Confiscating the property from the foundation that owns it? Presumably you don’t plan to pay compensation?
I'd be happy to pay them the value of the property net of the NPV of the £40bn a year that Brexit has shaved off the value of GDP.
Collective punishment is forbidden by the Geneva convention
I'm surprised Survation took the tables down - I thought as members of the BPC they were bound to publish them if the results had been made (selectively) public.
Anyway, someone got them before they were removed:
What the tables also reveal is the marked shift in opinion when the question is properly put in terms of a specific remain v leave choice vis a vis staying within the UK, rather than in vague aspirational terms of independence. Cameron should have but did not contest that wording and there are lessons there for the future.
I had an interesting conversation with a former colleague a couple of days ago. He wanted to talk about Brexit. When I mentioned potential federalism, he was outraged. "That's nothing to do with the EU," he said.
I pointed out the Treaty of Rome and 1957, but he shook his head "Nothing to do with the EU, we hadn't even joined then."
He's a mere stripling of 50, so it's understandable, I suppose.
Just to make sure I have understood this correctly: a) Am I right in saying there is no real expectation of this passing today or have I missed something? b) If a) is true why do it? Is it just desperation i.e. might as well have a go, nothing to lose except reputation. c) Is removing the PD really a substantial change? If so I don't understand why.
What do people think?
22 m may leaving date is contingent on the wa passing this week. It needs attempting ar least. And if it gets more votes that's a signal for Monday's indicative votrs.
I dont understand the pd issue, although as it us just a political thing which they are willing to change it seems meaningless to me
On IT generally, scrap it and simply treat as income. However the beneficiary should be allowed to add it to their pension pot.
IT is extremely unpopular. Surprisingly, at all income levels.
Most people find the idea of having to sell the family home to pay the taxman objectionable, and the fact they come looking for the money when you’re grieving reprehensible.
'Okay lads, we're scraping the bottom of the barrel of tired, old repeated memes; the EU has blinked is exhausted, the Paddies are shitting themselves is done, DEPLOY THE ROYAL YACHT!'
A more perfect waste of money it's difficult to imagine. The only thing I'd be in favour of building for the royals is a British version of the Ipatiev House.
So the ultras have no escape from the backstop, other than bankrupting the country?
This is actually a nonsensical position.
Firstly it implies that the EU only engages in pursuing trade deals for the sake of it, not because there might actually be some benefit to their members in doing so. Secondly, once we have actually left what is the backstop actually a backstop to? Under the WA a trade agreement is supposed to replace the need for a backstop, it has no value in a No deal situation. And thirdly, just because trade talks are opened, it doesn't mean they have to result in anything - payment of money could just as easily be made a condition of any agreement being signed off (of course, without a transition period, the bill isn't £39b, as that included payment for maintaining access to the Single Market for a couple of years).
Agreement of reciprocal citizens rights, fair enough - that could be made an upfront priority.
There are only two interpretations:
(A) they will find a way to make the withdrawal agreement available *after* we have left
Paddy and Betfair Sportsbook have mispriced an Oct GE. They have it as a quite ridiculous 33/1. Other bookies are where it should be (the 10/1 range) and it is layable on the Exchange at 19s.
I can't do it unfortunately since I am banned by PP and Sportsbook but if anybody has accounts with either, there is just the one thing to say - FILL YOUR BOOTS!
It seems the Conservative loyalists are still hoping the WA will pass today. Maybe but it will be the most pyrrhic of victories however puffed up it would be by the euphoria of the Mail and Express tomorrow.
I suspect some would try to urge May to withdraw her resignation and continue as PM but now I read she believes the country will be united by a new royal yacht. Unbelievable. I realise her deep affection bordering on obsequious fawning for the royal family but if you want to unite the country provide a new bank holiday.
I suppose others not feeling the love this morning are those who organised Brexit parties for this evening hoping at 11pm to celebrate our "freedom" from the tyrannical EU. They might yet get their chance.
If we pass the WA tonight we are presumably paying up the £39 billion divorce bill irrespective of what the future relationship may or may not be. Some might argue it would be a rare instance of somebody paying to become a slave.
Once Ireland and the EU insisted on the backstop then the path was set
Either that is acceptable to the UK parliament or it isn’t
If it isn’t then it’s no deal or revoke
But if we revoke then we are acknowledging we can never leave without the agreement of Ireland and hence are not sovereign
Is the backstop just the dichotomy you suggest or do different parties have different objections to the backstop? The DUP's principal objection is to a border down the Irish Sea, the GFA says no new border along the border, and the ERG objects mainly to becoming trapped as a vassal state. If so then one could imagine it might be possible to reassure some hold-outs but not others.
Paddy and Betfair Sportsbook have mispriced an Oct GE. They have it as a quite ridiculous 33/1. Other bookies are where it should be (the 10/1 range) and it is layable on the Exchange at 19s.
I can't do it unfortunately since I am banned by PP and Sportsbook but if anybody has accounts with either, there is just the one thing to say - FILL YOUR BOOTS!
:-)
Good tip. September at the same price is surely also value.
May would screw up given half a chance, but Charles' point is accurate. Revocation is waving the white flag. However it's the signal to the voters that that despite the promises, MPs will plough their own furrow, that would expose them. Hence the search to shift the blame.
A long extension and those with goldfish memories will forget.
Comments
Vote Leave and the Brexit gang has no plan.
May came to office with no plan and her first few months were wasted rhetorically alienating Remainers. She had a narrow opportunity to set the broad terms of Brexit and she flunked it.
It didn’t have to be this way.
Bring on the Brexit enquiry.
Maitlis took Mogg to task and Nicholas Watts recital of what a cabinet minister said to him was pure gold .
Anyway, someone got them before they were removed:
https://t.co/i07QXIyKPp
With the benefit of 20/20 hindsight though, somehow committing the Brexiteers to a written plan before the vote might have avoided much of this chaos.
Either it wouldn't have won the vote, or they couldn't disown it after the vote.
Yup, let’s sneer at ordinary looking patriotic northern people.
https://twitter.com/andrealeadsom/status/1111541970596433920
I reckon the final two will be The Saj v The Truss with Liz winning with the card-carrying rank and file.
She will then appoint a top team from outside of the current cabinet:
Chancellor - McVey
Home Sec - Patel
Foreign Sec - Raaaab
Please note that I have been very wrong in the past!
Fuck me, no wonder it has such a shitty rep.
That Times headline in the bottom right: Three quarters of outstanding schools decline. Did Michael Gove not abolish regression to the mean?
https://metro.co.uk/2019/03/27/pro-brexit-group-really-regrets-holding-second-referendum-poll-9035987/?ito=twitter
60% of Tory members in the survey want the Withdrawal Agreement to be passed today with 36% opposed
https://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2019/03/our-survey-three-in-five-party-members-back-mays-deal-it-has-a-majority-among-them-for-the-first-time.html
I think he means they had the choice of keeping her out of a home as long as possible?
Govt might support this amendment? Can’t see why not.
https://twitter.com/politicshome/status/1111530933092380673
They need 30+
In fairness that's unfair, hes not a DUP proxy as he really is against even if they came on board.
Pleasant day to all. Put all you myriad hopes on Monday. Maybe they'll make Clarke PM to oversee CU Brexit sans referendum.
...unless the PM is Corbyn.
If we want to have WTO terms with the EU, we can choose those, but do need to accept that choices have consequences.
Thanks for your sympathies about my MiL. She is a lovely old lady, even now.
She needs someone behind the scenes talking to Labour and saying this and that it would be a would force a hard Brexit Tory pm to call an election., which is what a Labour want.
https://twitter.com/MattChorley/status/1111344703507714048
"With the benefit of 20/20 hindsight though, somehow committing the Brexiteers to a written plan before the vote might have avoided much of this chaos."
An interesting suggestion for future referendums. For Indyref2, the SNP would need to explain carefully how 300 years of shared history could be disentangled before putting it forward.
In any case, it would be a task for the CS if it is to have any credibility. Why didn't they do it for Brexit? Oh, yes, Remainer Cameron stopped them. After all, he didn't want them giving Brexit credibility.
The ERG are blamed for this impasse, but if they all voted for May's deal, the numbers don't add up if the DUP are against. The Tory remainers, the SNP, the LDs and finally most of the Labour party, including those who pledged to honour the referendum result, would see to that.
My own MP, from a constituency with a 25,000 Labour majority and a 58% Leave vote, has consistently voted against any deal, and recently voted to revoke, despite voting to honour the result. Fairly normal behaviour for a honourable member of Parliament.
But I have a vision - if there us a rumour the gov would back the amendment the Tories whi come on board since MV2 will claim it's an outrage and refuse to back the deal
Claude Montfitchet has been playing Jeremy Corbyn for - what - nearly 40 years?
It still gives me a chuckle that in real life he owns the entire county of Westmorland.
16-20 is 20 too many.
a) Am I right in saying there is no real expectation of this passing today or have I missed something?
b) If a) is true why do it? Is it just desperation i.e. might as well have a go, nothing to lose except reputation.
c) Is removing the PD really a substantial change? If so I don't understand why.
What do people think?
Labour calls VoNC on Monday...
I pointed out the Treaty of Rome and 1957, but he shook his head "Nothing to do with the EU, we hadn't even joined then."
He's a mere stripling of 50, so it's understandable, I suppose.
Once Ireland and the EU insisted on the backstop then the path was set
Either that is acceptable to the UK parliament or it isn’t
If it isn’t then it’s no deal or revoke
But if we revoke then we are acknowledging we can never leave without the agreement of Ireland and hence are not sovereign
I dont understand the pd issue, although as it us just a political thing which they are willing to change it seems meaningless to me
https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1111540928119037952
(A) they will find a way to make the withdrawal agreement available *after* we have left
(B) they have no interest in a sensible deal
Paddy and Betfair Sportsbook have mispriced an Oct GE. They have it as a quite ridiculous 33/1. Other bookies are where it should be (the 10/1 range) and it is layable on the Exchange at 19s.
I can't do it unfortunately since I am banned by PP and Sportsbook but if anybody has accounts with either, there is just the one thing to say - FILL YOUR BOOTS!
:-)
The difference is that Vote Leave said we could leave cost free without any disruption, ‘we hold all the cards’ etc and that’s untrue.
PS - The universe loves irony. I mean for how long did we take Ireland’s sovereignty?
It seems the Conservative loyalists are still hoping the WA will pass today. Maybe but it will be the most pyrrhic of victories however puffed up it would be by the euphoria of the Mail and Express tomorrow.
I suspect some would try to urge May to withdraw her resignation and continue as PM but now I read she believes the country will be united by a new royal yacht. Unbelievable. I realise her deep affection bordering on obsequious fawning for the royal family but if you want to unite the country provide a new bank holiday.
I suppose others not feeling the love this morning are those who organised Brexit parties for this evening hoping at 11pm to celebrate our "freedom" from the tyrannical EU. They might yet get their chance.
If we pass the WA tonight we are presumably paying up the £39 billion divorce bill irrespective of what the future relationship may or may not be. Some might argue it would be a rare instance of somebody paying to become a slave.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/2020_democratic_presidential_nomination-6730.html
Trump's ratings have improved a bit since Mueller, but still near -10.
May would screw up given half a chance, but Charles' point is accurate. Revocation is waving the white flag. However it's the signal to the voters that that despite the promises, MPs will plough their own furrow, that would expose them. Hence the search to shift the blame.
A long extension and those with goldfish memories will forget.