One point which needs to be re-emphasised, as it seems to be getting a bit lost: if the deal is not approved today, then it follows, as night follows day, that we are leaving the EU in exactly two weeks time, in chaos and without any transition, unless parliament agrees something else which the government and the EU accept. (If that something is 'Revoke' then the EU's acceptance is not required).
Given that MPs are still faffing about discussing how many of their favourite unicorns can fit on a pin-head, and the fact that two weeks is not exactly ample time, the danger is pretty obvious, isn't it?
Yes, but listening to IDS this morning it seems like if the WA does miraculously pass today we then have less than eight weeks of failing to get the ERG to vote for the legal detail of what they vote for today, and then having a choice between no deal, or revoking without Euro elections and smashing up the legal order of the EU.
So that could end up being worse.
If the ERG were sensible (from their own perspective) that should be their plan. Vote the "in principle" WA through today and then switch en masse and vote the WAIB down next month. Pretty much guarantees a no deal exit.
That may be what the brighter ones have worked out already.
One point which needs to be re-emphasised, as it seems to be getting a bit lost: if the deal is not approved today, then it follows, as night follows day, that we are leaving the EU in exactly two weeks time, in chaos and without any transition, unless parliament agrees something else which the government and the EU accept. (If that something is 'Revoke' then the EU's acceptance is not required).
Given that MPs are still faffing about discussing how many of their favourite unicorns can fit on a pin-head, and the fact that two weeks is not exactly ample time, the danger is pretty obvious, isn't it?
It means IV2 has to identify a majority-supported decision on Monday, and then the government has to (by desire, compulsion or replacement) make parliamentary time available later next week to get the necessary extension application agreed and made.
And that decision has to be specific and realistic., and Labour have to stop playing cynical games, and the EU have to accept whatever it is, unanimously, and the government has to be able and willing to implement it.
What is the cumulative probability of that? 5%?
No, much higher. Remember both most MPs and the EU wants it to succeed. We were granted this short extension specifically to focus on identifying a new way forward, and to push May into going.
The decision doesn't have to have all its details ticked off to get the extension, but does need to appear realistic as you say. Already the options are narrowing to WA+CU, WA+CU+PV, or just possibly WA+PV.
I don't see much chance the EU wont give us time to develop any of these.
The problem is what political chaos at home ensues when the majority of the Tory Party realises its impotence, yet is still nominally in power.
But would or should the government agree to any of them? When only 33 Tory MPs out of over 300 voted for the terrible Customs Union idea? And when May goes and the ~280 Tory MPs opposed to a terrible Customs Union choose two candidates opposed to it . . . and the members choose a new PM opposed to it . . . what then?
Everything else has been designed for the Tory Party, if the Tory Party needs votes from other parties to pass its stuff then they could and should suck it up and compromise. But if they don't want to do that then a new election is also an option for them.
But given the PD isn't and can't be legally binding and given no PM can bind their successor what stops the next PM we know is going to be elected ripping up the customs union notion and saying actually I have another idea.
Mervyn King's interview on Today this morning was excellent. He favours leaving without a deal but with an agreement to hold the status quo for 6 months to manage the inevitable disruption. (from 2hrs:37mins) https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0003jvs
He should get 363 fellow economists to write a letter to The Times saying that.
#WrongThenWrongNow
The Hahn/Nield round-robin letter came from the Cambridge hotbed of radical economic naïvity. It is true that Mervyn did sign it when he was at Birmingham. He became much wiser since. I did not sign it, and many other academic economists I know also refused to sign it.
He was so wise he didn’t even spot the credit crisis of 2007.
Quite. And did not cover himself in glory in 2008 either.
He was talking rubbish when he said that there should be a No Deal exit with a six month transition deal. What the hell does he think the WA is?
Is it a reasonable interpretation that Corbyn and McDonell are trying to achieve a no deal Brexit whilst appearing not to? Today may be the last chance for the Labour moderates.
Tories on here panicking big time, Carlotta rallying the troops
Win win for Con party long term malc
Useless May offski either way Chance of a clean Brexit is up If vote wins then some sort of Brexit nailed down. Precedent set that leaving unions is unpleasant - ooops for Nicla..
I agree leaving a real union is unpleasant , not so much stopping being a colony
Such silly nonsense you spout, As I said the other day, Scots have been massively overrepresented in the British state and were responsible for leading colonialism in the hay day of Empire. The number of politicians and generals who either were Scottish or had Scottish lineage is too big to list; you could say that the Scots have colonised Britain! Nationalists the world over get off on their own lies and fake grievances, but few can out-do the mendacity of the Scottish variety.
Mervyn King's interview on Today this morning was excellent. He favours leaving without a deal but with an agreement to hold the status quo for 6 months to manage the inevitable disruption. (from 2hrs:37mins) https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0003jvs
He should get 363 fellow economists to write a letter to The Times saying that.
#WrongThenWrongNow
The Hahn/Nield round-robin letter came from the Cambridge hotbed of radical economic naïvity. It is true that Mervyn did sign it when he was at Birmingham. He became much wiser since. I did not sign it, and many other academic economists I know also refused to sign it.
He was so wise he didn’t even spot the credit crisis of 2007.
Quite. And did not cover himself in glory in 2008 either.
He was talking rubbish when he said that there should be a No Deal exit with a six month transition deal. What the hell does he think the WA is?
Can't speak for him but for me the WA is an awful agreement that leads to a PERMANENT backstop.
Is it a reasonable interpretation that Corbyn and McDonell are trying to achieve a no deal Brexit whilst appearing not to? Today may be the last chance for the Labour moderates.
Tories on here panicking big time, Carlotta rallying the troops
Win win for Con party long term malc
Useless May offski either way Chance of a clean Brexit is up If vote wins then some sort of Brexit nailed down. Precedent set that leaving unions is unpleasant - ooops for Nicla..
Brexit is a lose lose for all of the UK, but particularly for the Tories, the ex-party of the economy and sensible government.
That was the old wet establishment May's Remain Tories Nigel. They are finished forever.
Ah yes, replaced by Boris Johnson and Jacob Rees Mogg, those fine old-Etonian anti-establishment figures. Guffaw!
Just like with the Labour Party, the grown ups will eventually have to come back to clear up the play room.
Neither Boris nor JRM will be anywhere near being leader.
Hillary Benn - "It's like selling your house without knowing where you are going to live next" - I've done that, millions of people do it!! It's how you help keep the chain short!
Mervyn King's interview on Today this morning was excellent. He favours leaving without a deal but with an agreement to hold the status quo for 6 months to manage the inevitable disruption. (from 2hrs:37mins) https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0003jvs
I heard this live - the most sensible and coherent Brexiteer interview for quite some time.
I've never heard anything like it from John Humphrys. He didn't challenge King barely once. Mervyn King may have given a reasonable account of himself, but John Humphrys most certainly didn't.
So - are you complaining that he didn't interrupt and prevent Mr King from putting forward his answers to the questions - like most of the BBC reporters fail to do when interviewing Remainers.
No, he simply didn't challenge any of his statements or put them to the test, after hearing them. He's usually better at this, or used to be, as well as the abrasive interrupting, but there was none of that today.
I don't know if this is the usual ramping bullshit but the Betfair odds on this thing passing today have tightened considerably in the last hour or so.
One point which needs to be re-emphasised, as it seems to be getting a bit lost: if the deal is not approved today, then it follows, as night follows day, that we are leaving the EU in exactly two weeks time, in chaos and without any transition, unless parliament agrees something else which the government and the EU accept. (If that something is 'Revoke' then the EU's acceptance is not required).
Given that MPs are still faffing about discussing how many of their favourite unicorns can fit on a pin-head, and the fact that two weeks is not exactly ample time, the danger is pretty obvious, isn't it?
It is a point I have been making over and over, anove and below the line.
Too many in the UK are hoping that the EU will come to our rescue......oh the irony!
Everyone in the House including IDS are very confident they will make such an offer - I think they are right but there is a lack of awareness that there is a not insignificant risk somebody will say no (or agree but with absolutely humiliating conditions where the UK will be a curtailed member, not allowed to exercise its membership properly)
I don't see any risk free options?
True but getting the May 22nd extension is in our power - everything else is much higher risk
But given the PD isn't and can't be legally binding and given no PM can bind their successor what stops the next PM we know is going to be elected ripping up the customs union notion and saying actually I have another idea.
This is ludicrous.
Oh, I see, yes, I agree. It's not at all clear how opposition MPs are supposed to trust the government to deliver on a trade they make now, given all the obvious pressures it will have not to; I mean, there will be other votes and they may have similar dynamics, but the opposition can't be sure it will have the same kind of leverage.
This is the strength of the Deal+Referendum option: You can make a binding referendum which automatically gives the winning side what it's promised, and if anybody reneges then the whole thing goes down together.
But given the PD isn't and can't be legally binding and given no PM can bind their successor what stops the next PM we know is going to be elected ripping up the customs union notion and saying actually I have another idea.
This is ludicrous.
Doesn't the Clarke plan require the CU to be legislated for?
See what I mean. Nandy clearly has no intention of ever voting for the WA, the resignation issue is a stupid reason to vote for ir against, it's an excuse. Either the WA is ok or it isn't, and Nandy and her bedfellows in the ERG are playing games. I feel quite confident in my prediction, as it's based only on including Tories who explicitly switch, and assuming virtually no lab rebels emerge.
Mervyn King's interview on Today this morning was excellent. He favours leaving without a deal but with an agreement to hold the status quo for 6 months to manage the inevitable disruption. (from 2hrs:37mins) https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0003jvs
Excellent! Just a few questions:
1) Has he personally the power to bring this agreement about? 2) Can he persuade the Government to request this agreement from the EU? 3) Can he persuade the EU to accept it? 4) Can he do any of this by April 12th?
A "fantasy" is a dream of the future. A "plan" is a set of steps to bring it about. A "realistic plan" is a plan based on reality. "Achievement" is devoting the necessary resources to a realistic plan and enacting the steps until done.
Comments
That may be what the brighter ones have worked out already.
This is ludicrous.
He was talking rubbish when he said that there should be a No Deal exit with a six month transition deal. What the hell does he think the WA is?
I'm with the DUP on this one.
It was 12, is now 5.
NEW THREAD
This is the strength of the Deal+Referendum option: You can make a binding referendum which automatically gives the winning side what it's promised, and if anybody reneges then the whole thing goes down together.
EXITED
1) Has he personally the power to bring this agreement about?
2) Can he persuade the Government to request this agreement from the EU?
3) Can he persuade the EU to accept it?
4) Can he do any of this by April 12th?
A "fantasy" is a dream of the future. A "plan" is a set of steps to bring it about. A "realistic plan" is a plan based on reality. "Achievement" is devoting the necessary resources to a realistic plan and enacting the steps until done.