Thornberry on Sophy as evasive as ever and clearly does not understand, as so many, the difference between the WDA and the PD. She wants a custom unions but that would be in the non binding PD and not the WDA and could be binned in future UK - EU negotiations
All mps and the public need to understand that on the WDA TM is correct.
Everything needed to leave the EU is in the WDA without which we do not leave
Or we leave with no deal, which I fully expect to be bad news (if not quite the extinction level economic calamity most people are predicting). That is the simple point those who vote down the deal in an apparent wish to Revoke appear incapable of getting their heads round.
No deal is getting very real and very imminent.
It will happen in 12 days if we do not stop it and I am not at all sure without TM WDA we can stop it
Oh yes.
The EU are now expecting No Deal. And I think you are right Big G that unless we can pass something in the next 12 days, including, if necessary the legislation enabling EU elections, we are going over Niagara sans barrel.
I understand that legislation isn’t required for EU elections simply an order made by the relevant minister setting the date? However it is extremely concerning how many people simply don’t understand the purpose of the WA and think that they can declare it “dead” while still notionally advocating EU departure without a deal.
It shows what it thinks would have happened had we taken a different course. Balls and uncles come to mind.
PS My stories may be sh*te but they are my own work.
You have misunderstood the CER graph. The comparison is with the actual performance of a basket of other countries used to model our own economy.
Nobody is seriously claiming Brexit has aided our economy, and there’s decent enough evidence of resultant economic slowdown, yet for some reason PB’s finest wish to attack this graph?
It must truly be embarrassing to have voted for Brexit.
It must be totally embarrasing to take the CER graph at face value without delving into the source of their data. This is a fine example of cherry-picking your data.
So what? If our economy were in lock-step with the German economy, we'd have been able to join the Euro. It is you who is cherry-picking data. The deviation is real. The interpretation, or if you prefer, the speculation that this is due to Brexit could, however, be wrong.
It seems you don't understand - the figures have been selected to show that the UK is doing worse than other countries, and then hang the blame on Brexit - It is true that we are doing relatively worse than the USA - but we are growing at a comparable rate to Germany and Luxembourg. The reason why we are doing worse than the USA is due to Trump's expansionist policies - cutting taxes etc and has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that we held a referendum in 2016.
He at best misrepresented his past on his CV. He’s very,very stupid. He has actively lied about Brexit and consequences. He’s a charlatan with the charisma of a verucca.
For the Hamilton family, the Mayor of London is a Muslim and "this is a problem". "He's trying to ban the sale of bacon. We want him hanged and cut into pieces, "says Matilda (right).
Thornberry on Sophy as evasive as ever and clearly does not understand, as so many, the difference between the WDA and the PD. She wants a custom unions but that would be in the non binding PD and not the WDA and could be binned in future UK - EU negotiations
All mps and the public need to understand that on the WDA TM is correct.
Everything needed to leave the EU is in the WDA without which we do not leave
Or we leave with no deal, which I fully expect to be bad news (if not quite the extinction level economic calamity most people are predicting). That is the simple point those who vote down the deal in an apparent wish to Revoke appear incapable of getting their heads round.
No deal is getting very real and very imminent.
It will happen in 12 days if we do not stop it and I am not at all sure without TM WDA we can stop it
Oh yes.
The EU are now expecting No Deal. And I think you are right Big G that unless we can pass something in the next 12 days, including, if necessary the legislation enabling EU elections, we are going over Niagara sans barrel.
That course has already been locked in. Even if MPs suddenly rally round an option on Monday - permanent Customs Union for example - it simply won't happen. May knows that CU will split her party and therefore she will refuse to heel - it's only "advisory" remember and if MPs pass her deal they can have whatever they like later.
Of course the House won't like being ignored, but what sanctions do they have? With the support of the DUP and Ultra-ERG she has enough protection to keep her safe for the remaining days - and Tory MPs of the "it's like the living dead in here" persuasion will have seen what happened to Grieve and think about their careers.
Which is where a National Unity Government remains the final play. Whether that is an actual government with an actual PM remains to be seen - could we see a NUG quickly take control of house business and pass it's own emergency legislation regardless of what the supposed government thinks? If it has a majority, and the supposed government does not...?
And it is ridiculous “Parliament” criticising May for not following an “alternative” course when they won’t even give her an alternative course to reject to follow.
I am going to pose a question as I do not know the answer
There is a wide held view that no deal will not happen, but that contradicts many including the EU
So, in order for no deal to be stopped
TM WDA is approved before 12th April and if not
I assume legislation is required to pass both the HOC and HOL and needs royal assent
Furthermore, is legislation required for the UK to take part in the EU elections
I am very interested in fellow posters comments and knowledge
I disclaim any knowledge, but it seems to me that even if a significant majority in the House can agree on a serious alternative to May’s WA, it would need at a minimum to be able to demonstrate to the EU that the majority is sustainable - if there were to be any chance of a further extension from the EU.
Passing legislation into law without the co-operation of the government simply isnt going to happen in the next ten days. And almost certainly isn’t, even with it.
In other words, any significant alternative needs the current government’s active approval, or a new government commanding a majority in the existing parliament, by the end of the week.
Thank you for responding and as I read it you seem to be confirming my worst fears in so far as no deal legislation and EU election legislation does not have the time or government support at this late stage, and for all the debate on here, TM deal is the only way to stop no deal
I think I have heard that many times from TM and now it looks very real
For the Hamilton family, the Mayor of London is a Muslim and "this is a problem". "He's trying to ban the sale of bacon. We want him hanged and cut into pieces, "says Matilda (right).
Basic breach of GDPR regulations there - unless the family gave their permission to have their names plastered over the media.
If they agreed to be interviewed and have their photo taken there is no breach of anything. There are very clear provisions in GDPR that exempt news journalism from its requirements. In any case GDPR is a European law imposed on the UK against its will, isn’t it?
I am going to pose a question as I do not know the answer
There is a wide held view that no deal will not happen, but that contradicts many including the EU
So, in order for no deal to be stopped
TM WDA is approved before 12th April and if not
I assume legislation is required to pass both the HOC and HOL and needs royal assent
Furthermore, is legislation required for the UK to take part in the EU elections
I am very interested in fellow posters comments and knowledge
I disclaim any knowledge, but it seems to me that even if a significant majority in the House can agree on a serious alternative to May’s WA, it would need at a minimum to be able to demonstrate to the EU that the majority is sustainable - if there were to be any chance of a further extension from the EU.
Passing legislation into law without the co-operation of the government simply isnt going to happen in the next ten days. And almost certainly isn’t, even with it.
In other words, any significant alternative needs the current government’s active approval, or a new government commanding a majority in the existing parliament, by the end of the week.
Just guessing here but on the EU elections point they would presumably only need something passed to hold them if article 50 or something else the government passed since the referendum had stopped them* as I assume they just automatically ran on the European parliamentary timetable without input from the house of commons usually...
*Which another assumption the government originally hoped would be us agree the withdrawal agreement before the elections.
And it is ridiculous “Parliament” criticising May for not following an “alternative” course when they won’t even give her an alternative course to reject to follow.
Rawnsley: She got the keys to Number 10 because Tory MPs thought her a safe bet. She’s been anything but.
One of her few friends once told me that Mrs May approached Brexit as if the country had set her a piece of fiendishly difficult homework. The downside of this doggedness has been inflexibility... She didn’t have the largeness of character and the breadth of political skills necessary to handle the vast complexity of the Brexit challenge, but then it is arguable that such a person does not exist.
The Tory party is now preparing to find a new chief for its cannibalistic tribe. It will be convenient for a lot of people, especially those planning to contest for the corroded crown, to cast all the blame for 33 months of unrelenting and still unresolved chaos on the woman who will soon be leaving Number 10. Convenient, but not altogether accurate. The problem with the Conservative party is not Mrs May. The problem with the Conservative party is the Conservative party. The problem with Brexit is not Mrs May. The problem with Brexit is Brexit.
I am going to pose a question as I do not know the answer
There is a wide held view that no deal will not happen, but that contradicts many including the EU
So, in order for no deal to be stopped
TM WDA is approved before 12th April and if not
I assume legislation is required to pass both the HOC and HOL and needs royal assent
Furthermore, is legislation required for the UK to take part in the EU elections
I am very interested in fellow posters comments and knowledge
I disclaim any knowledge, but it seems to me that even if a significant majority in the House can agree on a serious alternative to May’s WA, it would need at a minimum to be able to demonstrate to the EU that the majority is sustainable - if there were to be any chance of a further extension from the EU.
Passing legislation into law without the co-operation of the government simply isnt going to happen in the next ten days. And almost certainly isn’t, even with it.
In other words, any significant alternative needs the current government’s active approval, or a new government commanding a majority in the existing parliament, by the end of the week.
Thank you for responding and as I read it you seem to be confirming my worst fears in so far as no deal legislation and EU election legislation does not have the time or government support at this late stage, and for all the debate on here, TM deal is the only way to stop no deal
I think I have heard that many times from TM and now it looks very real
Yes, I’m quite open to correction, but the only alternative would seem to be a GNU seeking an extension for an alternate policy, and the probability of that looks vanishingly small.
If Parliament was going to revolt, it should have done so several months ago.
That said, there is perhaps some value in Monday’s votes in demonstrating where we are. They might have had a great deal more value had they taken place before Christmas.
I've backed Sainz to win his group at 4.33. The others are Magnussen, Raikkonen, and Gasly.
Magnussen and Sainz had practically identical times throughout qualifying, but I think the Haas might benefit relatively more from its Ferrari engine's 'party mode', which will unwind during the race to the advantage of Sainz's Renault-powered McLaren. Raikkonen is in a similar boat to Magnussen. Gasly starts 13th in a theoretically much faster car and could benefit from choice of tyres, but he's still some way further back.
Interesting write up, MD. After you proved me wrong about Leclerc in FP1, it was good to see him win pole, as I’d suggested this was the better bet. Profitable for both of us, so far.
I’m not convinced that Mercedes have much of an engine advantage in qualifying, if any at all, so your race calculations might be sllightly skewed. The silver team certainly sounded more confident about having a chance in the race. I think Ferrari will still probably win, but Hamilton’s odds look a bit too long to me.
I've taken 5/1 against Lewis Hamilton but of course at this stage of the season there is still an element of guesswork about each car's performance characteristics.
He at best misrepresented his past on his CV. He’s very,very stupid. He has actively lied about Brexit and consequences. He’s a charlatan with the charisma of a verucca.
For the Hamilton family, the Mayor of London is a Muslim and "this is a problem". "He's trying to ban the sale of bacon. We want him hanged and cut into pieces, "says Matilda (right).
For the Hamilton family, the Mayor of London is a Muslim and "this is a problem". "He's trying to ban the sale of bacon. We want him hanged and cut into pieces, "says Matilda (right).
I am going to pose a question as I do not know the answer
There is a wide held view that no deal will not happen, but that contradicts many including the EU
So, in order for no deal to be stopped
TM WDA is approved before 12th April and if not
I assume legislation is required to pass both the HOC and HOL and needs royal assent
Furthermore, is legislation required for the UK to take part in the EU elections
I am very interested in fellow posters comments and knowledge
I disclaim any knowledge, but it seems to me that even if a significant majority in the House can agree on a serious alternative to May’s WA, it would need at a minimum to be able to demonstrate to the EU that the majority is sustainable - if there were to be any chance of a further extension from the EU.
Passing legislation into law without the co-operation of the government simply isnt going to happen in the next ten days. And almost certainly isn’t, even with it.
In other words, any significant alternative needs the current government’s active approval, or a new government commanding a majority in the existing parliament, by the end of the week.
Just guessing here but on the EU elections point they would presumably only need something passed to hold them if article 50 or something else the government passed since the referendum had stopped them* as I assume they just automatically ran on the European parliamentary timetable without input from the house of commons usually...
*Which another assumption the government originally hoped would be us agree the withdrawal agreement before the elections.
All guesswork no knowledge.
You are honest when you say it is guess work and that is why I have sought fellow posters opinion
As Nigel B has implied there is no chance that any legislation to stop no deal or take part in the EU elections can pass to Royal assent by the 12th April and we all need to get real and understand the absolute danger we are in and the choice really does look like TM WDA or we are going off the cliff
And it is ridiculous “Parliament” criticising May for not following an “alternative” course when they won’t even give her an alternative course to reject to follow.
Nail. Head.
Not at all. It has been evident for some time - and will hopefully become clear tomorrow - that there is a majority in Parliament for a softer route to Brexit. May's delay and obfuscation have since the beginning been intended to thwart this majority from expressing itself.
For the Hamilton family, the Mayor of London is a Muslim and "this is a problem". "He's trying to ban the sale of bacon. We want him hanged and cut into pieces, "says Matilda (right).
Basic breach of GDPR regulations there - unless the family gave their permission to have their names plastered over the media.
Twaddle. The curse of the PB “expert” strikes again although, to be fair, there is so much bollocks talked about the GDPR everywhere. If what you say were true there would be no vox pops on the TV news or radio call in shows. The GDPR requires member states to to provide protection for the right to freedom of expression, the so-called “special purposes exemption” which protects processing for the purposes of journalism, art and literature (and now academic purposes) has survived from the old Data Protection Act and in fact has been widened in scope and application under the new regime. Whereas there was an express exemption for journalism in the Data Protection Act 1998 that is actually expanded upon in the 2018 version (that essentially clarifies and supplements the GDPR in the UK even though it has direct effect) - Schedule 2, Part 5, para 26(3) DPA 2018 if you’re interested.
Nobody who has voted against May's Deal can at this stage say they are unwilling to countenance No Deal. That's the alternative and that's what they voted for. It may not be what they intended, but intentions don't count.
Rawnsley: She got the keys to Number 10 because Tory MPs thought her a safe bet. She’s been anything but.
One of her few friends once told me that Mrs May approached Brexit as if the country had set her a piece of fiendishly difficult homework. The downside of this doggedness has been inflexibility... She didn’t have the largeness of character and the breadth of political skills necessary to handle the vast complexity of the Brexit challenge, but then it is arguable that such a person does not exist.
The Tory party is now preparing to find a new chief for its cannibalistic tribe. It will be convenient for a lot of people, especially those planning to contest for the corroded crown, to cast all the blame for 33 months of unrelenting and still unresolved chaos on the woman who will soon be leaving Number 10. Convenient, but not altogether accurate. The problem with the Conservative party is not Mrs May. The problem with the Conservative party is the Conservative party. The problem with Brexit is not Mrs May. The problem with Brexit is Brexit.
I am going to pose a question as I do not know the answer
There is a wide held view that no deal will not happen, but that contradicts many including the EU
So, in order for no deal to be stopped
TM WDA is approved before 12th April and if not
I assume legislation is required to pass both the HOC and HOL and needs royal assent
Furthermore, is legislation required for the UK to take part in the EU elections
I am very interested in fellow posters comments and knowledge
I disclaim any knowledge, but it seems to me that even if a significant majority in the House can agree on a serious alternative to May’s WA, it would need at a minimum to be able to demonstrate to the EU that the majority is sustainable - if there were to be any chance of a further extension from the EU.
Passing legislation into law without the co-operation of the government simply isnt going to happen in the next ten days. And almost certainly isn’t, even with it.
In other words, any significant alternative needs the current government’s active approval, or a new government commanding a majority in the existing parliament, by the end of the week.
Just guessing here but on the EU elections point they would presumably only need something passed to hold them if article 50 or something else the government passed since the referendum had stopped them* as I assume they just automatically ran on the European parliamentary timetable without input from the house of commons usually...
*Which another assumption the government originally hoped would be us agree the withdrawal agreement before the elections.
All guesswork no knowledge.
The EU election issue is a distraction, I think. They could be managed much more easily than any alternative deal which required our holding them could be arranged.
I am going to pose a question as I do not know the answer
There is a wide held view that no deal will not happen, but that contradicts many including the EU
So, in order for no deal to be stopped
TM WDA is approved before 12th April and if not
I assume legislation is required to pass both the HOC and HOL and needs royal assent
Furthermore, is legislation required for the UK to take part in the EU elections
I am very interested in fellow posters comments and knowledge
I disclaim any knowledge, but it seems to me that even if a significant majority in the House can agree on a serious alternative to May’s WA, it would need at a minimum to be able to demonstrate to the EU that the majority is sustainable - if there were to be any chance of a further extension from the EU.
Passing legislation into law without the co-operation of the government simply isnt going to happen in the next ten days. And almost certainly isn’t, even with it.
In other words, any significant alternative needs the current government’s active approval, or a new government commanding a majority in the existing parliament, by the end of the week.
Thank you for responding and as I read it you seem to be confirming my worst fears in so far as no deal legislation and EU election legislation does not have the time or government support at this late stage, and for all the debate on here, TM deal is the only way to stop no deal
I think I have heard that many times from TM and now it looks very real
Yes, I’m quite open to correction, but the only alternative would seem to be a GNU seeking an extension for an alternate policy, and the probability of that looks vanishingly small.
If Parliament was going to revolt, it should have done so several months ago.
That said, there is perhaps some value in Monday’s votes in demonstrating where we are. They might have had a great deal more value had they taken place before Christmas.
I am going to pose a question as I do not know the answer
There is a wide held view that no deal will not happen, but that contradicts many including the EU
So, in order for no deal to be stopped
TM WDA is approved before 12th April and if not
I assume legislation is required to pass both the HOC and HOL and needs royal assent
Furthermore, is legislation required for the UK to take part in the EU elections
I am very interested in fellow posters comments and knowledge
I disclaim any knowledge, but it seems to me that even if a significant majority in the House can agree on a serious alternative to May’s WA, it would need at a minimum to be able to demonstrate to the EU that the majority is sustainable - if there were to be any chance of a further extension from the EU.
Passing legislation into law without the co-operation of the government simply isnt going to happen in the next ten days. And almost certainly isn’t, even with it.
In other words, any significant alternative needs the current government’s active approval, or a new government commanding a majority in the existing parliament, by the end of the week.
I don't think it's at all clear what the EU 27 would require for a further extension, beyond organizing the elections. Potentially almost nothing, since No Deal is exceptionally bad for Ireland, and to date they've had Ireland's back.
And it is ridiculous “Parliament” criticising May for not following an “alternative” course when they won’t even give her an alternative course to reject to follow.
Nail. Head.
Not at all. It has been evident for some time - and will hopefully become clear tomorrow - that there is a majority in Parliament for a softer route to Brexit. May's delay and obfuscation have since the beginning been intended to thwart this majority from expressing itself.
There is no majority in Parliament for anything, as has been graphically demonstrated this week. That is the whole problem.
It is ironic when you consider they insisted on voting on the Withdrawal Agreement because they didn't trust May not to mess it up, but are now the ones messing it up themselves.
For the Hamilton family, the Mayor of London is a Muslim and "this is a problem". "He's trying to ban the sale of bacon. We want him hanged and cut into pieces, "says Matilda (right).
For the Hamilton family, the Mayor of London is a Muslim and "this is a problem". "He's trying to ban the sale of bacon. We want him hanged and cut into pieces, "says Matilda (right).
Thornberry on Sophy as evasive as ever and clearly does not understand, as so many, the difference between the WDA and the PD. She wants a custom unions but that would be in the non binding PD and not the WDA and could be binned in future UK - EU negotiations
All mps and the public need to understand that on the WDA TM is correct.
Everything needed to leave the EU is in the WDA without which we do not leave
MPs understand all this just fine. They just wish to present opposition to whichever options they dont want as broadly as possible.
And it is ridiculous “Parliament” criticising May for not following an “alternative” course when they won’t even give her an alternative course to reject to follow.
Nail. Head.
May refused to give them an alternative until she was forced to do so just a few days ago.
She’s tried to dictate the whole process from the beginning. If it wasn’t for Gina Miller, Parliament would not have been asked at all.
Rawnsley: She got the keys to Number 10 because Tory MPs thought her a safe bet. She’s been anything but.
One of her few friends once told me that Mrs May approached Brexit as if the country had set her a piece of fiendishly difficult homework. The downside of this doggedness has been inflexibility... She didn’t have the largeness of character and the breadth of political skills necessary to handle the vast complexity of the Brexit challenge, but then it is arguable that such a person does not exist.
The Tory party is now preparing to find a new chief for its cannibalistic tribe. It will be convenient for a lot of people, especially those planning to contest for the corroded crown, to cast all the blame for 33 months of unrelenting and still unresolved chaos on the woman who will soon be leaving Number 10. Convenient, but not altogether accurate. The problem with the Conservative party is not Mrs May. The problem with the Conservative party is the Conservative party. The problem with Brexit is not Mrs May. The problem with Brexit is Brexit.
And it is ridiculous “Parliament” criticising May for not following an “alternative” course when they won’t even give her an alternative course to reject to follow.
Nail. Head.
Not at all. It has been evident for some time - and will hopefully become clear tomorrow - that there is a majority in Parliament for a softer route to Brexit. May's delay and obfuscation have since the beginning been intended to thwart this majority from expressing itself.
It will be interesting to watch what the DUP does now the English nationalist Tory loons have abandoned them.
I am going to pose a question as I do not know the answer
There is a wide held view that no deal will not happen, but that contradicts many including the EU
So, in order for no deal to be stopped
TM WDA is approved before 12th April and if not
I assume legislation is required to pass both the HOC and HOL and needs royal assent
Furthermore, is legislation required for the UK to take part in the EU elections
I am very interested in fellow posters comments and knowledge
There's an argument that Miller was based on loss of rights and only applies to enacting A50 rather than revoking it. In which case revocation is simply a matter of the PM - May or someone else put in place for such a purpose - sending a letter.
It shows what it thinks would have happened had we taken a different course. Balls and uncles come to mind.
PS My stories may be sh*te but they are my own work.
You have misunderstood the CER graph. The comparison is with the actual performance of a basket of other countries used to model our own economy.
Nobody is seriously claiming Brexit has aided our economy, and there’s decent enough evidence of resultant economic slowdown, yet for some reason PB’s finest wish to attack this graph?
It must truly be embarrassing to have voted for Brexit.
It must be totally embarrasing to take the CER graph at face value without delving into the source of their data. This is a fine example of cherry-picking your data.
So what? If our economy were in lock-step with the German economy, we'd have been able to join the Euro. It is you who is cherry-picking data. The deviation is real. The interpretation, or if you prefer, the speculation that this is due to Brexit could, however, be wrong.
It seems you don't understand - the figures have been selected to show that the UK is doing worse than other countries, and then hang the blame on Brexit - It is true that we are doing relatively worse than the USA - but we are growing at a comparable rate to Germany and Luxembourg. The reason why we are doing worse than the USA is due to Trump's expansionist policies - cutting taxes etc and has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that we held a referendum in 2016.
If you drag your American comparison back further in time, it should also show the damage Osborne did as Chancellor, as well as the damage Angela Merkel did as Chancellor. Austerity for the loss!
Thornberry on Sophy as evasive as ever and clearly does not understand, as so many, the difference between the WDA and the PD. She wants a custom unions but that would be in the non binding PD and not the WDA and could be binned in future UK - EU negotiations
All mps and the public need to understand that on the WDA TM is correct.
Everything needed to leave the EU is in the WDA without which we do not leave
Or we leave with no deal, which I fully expect to be bad news (if not quite the extinction level economic calamity most people are predicting). That is the simple point those who vote down the deal in an apparent wish to Revoke appear incapable of getting their heads round.
No deal is getting very real and very imminent.
It will happen in 12 days if we do not stop it and I am not at all sure without TM WDA we can stop it
Oh yes.
The EU are now expecting No Deal. And I think you are right Big G that unless we can pass something in the next 12 days, including, if necessary the legislation enabling EU elections, we are going over Niagara sans barrel.
That course has already been locked in. Even if MPs suddenly rally round an option on Monday - permanent Customs Union for example - it simply won't happen. May knows that CU will split her party and therefore she will refuse to heel - it's only "advisory" remember and if MPs pass her deal they can have whatever they like later.
Of course the House won't like being ignored, but what sanctions do they have? With the support of the DUP and Ultra-ERG she has enough protection to keep her safe for the remaining days - and Tory MPs of the "it's like the living dead in here" persuasion will have seen what happened to Grieve and think about their careers.
Which is where a National Unity Government remains the final play. Whether that is an actual government with an actual PM remains to be seen - could we see a NUG quickly take control of house business and pass it's own emergency legislation regardless of what the supposed government thinks? If it has a majority, and the supposed government does not...?
Can't see a proposed GNU being anything other than a wild beast. Even if it managed to pass Brexit legislation, that would be the scope of its agreement. All other legislation would get blocked - with the possible exception of repealing the FTPA.
And it is ridiculous “Parliament” criticising May for not following an “alternative” course when they won’t even give her an alternative course to reject to follow.
Nail. Head.
May refused to give them an alternative until she was forced to do so just a few days ago.
She’s tried to dictate the whole process from the beginning. If it wasn’t for Gina Miller, Parliament would not have been asked at all.
And when she did offer alternatives they rejected them all. Rendering your point moot.
Gina Miller really has a lot to answer for. But Parliament has far more to answer for.
I am going to pose a question as I do not know the answer
There is a wide held view that no deal will not happen, but that contradicts many including the EU
So, in order for no deal to be stopped
TM WDA is approved before 12th April and if not
I assume legislation is required to pass both the HOC and HOL and needs royal assent
Furthermore, is legislation required for the UK to take part in the EU elections
I am very interested in fellow posters comments and knowledge
I disclaim any knowledge, but it seems to me that even if a significant majority in the House can agree on a serious alternative to May’s WA, it would need at a minimum to be able to demonstrate to the EU that the majority is sustainable - if there were to be any chance of a further extension from the EU.
Passing legislation into law without the co-operation of the government simply isnt going to happen in the next ten days. And almost certainly isn’t, even with it.
In other words, any significant alternative needs the current government’s active approval, or a new government commanding a majority in the existing parliament, by the end of the week.
I don't think it's at all clear what the EU 27 would require for a further extension, beyond organizing the elections. Potentially almost nothing, since No Deal is exceptionally bad for Ireland, and to date they've had Ireland's back.
I’m not convinced that’s true, but our government requesting it would seem to be the absolute minimum requirement - and that would not seem to be the existing government’s intention at all.
And it is ridiculous “Parliament” criticising May for not following an “alternative” course when they won’t even give her an alternative course to reject to follow.
Nail. Head.
Not at all. It has been evident for some time - and will hopefully become clear tomorrow - that there is a majority in Parliament for a softer route to Brexit. May's delay and obfuscation have since the beginning been intended to thwart this majority from expressing itself.
It will be interesting to watch what the DUP does now the English nationalist Tory loons have abandoned them.
And it is ridiculous “Parliament” criticising May for not following an “alternative” course when they won’t even give her an alternative course to reject to follow.
Nail. Head.
May refused to give them an alternative until she was forced to do so just a few days ago.
She’s tried to dictate the whole process from the beginning. If it wasn’t for Gina Miller, Parliament would not have been asked at all.
And when she did offer alternatives they rejected them all. Rendering your point moot.
Gina Miller really has a lot to answer for. But Parliament has far more to answer for.
Have a good morning.
They haven't rejected anything, yet. Wednesday was simply the first indication of potential support, and Cabinet didn't even participate. Clarke only missed by six votes and it looks very clearly likely to get a majority at stage two.
And it is ridiculous “Parliament” criticising May for not following an “alternative” course when they won’t even give her an alternative course to reject to follow.
Nail. Head.
May refused to give them an alternative until she was forced to do so just a few days ago.
She’s tried to dictate the whole process from the beginning. If it wasn’t for Gina Miller, Parliament would not have been asked at all.
I am going to pose a question as I do not know the answer
There is a wide held view that no deal will not happen, but that contradicts many including the EU
So, in order for no deal to be stopped
TM WDA is approved before 12th April and if not
I assume legislation is required to pass both the HOC and HOL and needs royal assent
Furthermore, is legislation required for the UK to take part in the EU elections
I am very interested in fellow posters comments and knowledge
I disclaim any knowledge, but it seems to me that even if a significant majority in the House can agree on a serious alternative to May’s WA, it would need at a minimum to be able to demonstrate to the EU that the majority is sustainable - if there were to be any chance of a further extension from the EU.
Passing legislation into law without the co-operation of the government simply isnt going to happen in the next ten days. And almost certainly isn’t, even with it.
In other words, any significant alternative needs the current government’s active approval, or a new government commanding a majority in the existing parliament, by the end of the week.
I don't think it's at all clear what the EU 27 would require for a further extension, beyond organizing the elections. Potentially almost nothing, since No Deal is exceptionally bad for Ireland, and to date they've had Ireland's back.
I’m not convinced that’s true, but our government requesting it would seem to be the absolute minimum requirement - and that would not seem to be the existing government’s intention at all.
Yet May was about to ask for it last week, until the rightwingers in her Cabinet stopped her.
I am going to pose a question as I do not know the answer
There is a wide held view that no deal will not happen, but that contradicts many including the EU
So, in order for no deal to be stopped
TM WDA is approved before 12th April and if not
I assume legislation is required to pass both the HOC and HOL and needs royal assent
Furthermore, is legislation required for the UK to take part in the EU elections
I am very interested in fellow posters comments and knowledge
I disclaim any knowledge, but it seems to me that even if a significant majority in the House can agree on a serious alternative to May’s WA, it would need at a minimum to be able to demonstrate to the EU that the majority is sustainable - if there were to be any chance of a further extension from the EU.
Passing legislation into law without the co-operation of the government simply isnt going to happen in the next ten days. And almost certainly isn’t, even with it.
In other words, any significant alternative needs the current government’s active approval, or a new government commanding a majority in the existing parliament, by the end of the week.
Just guessing here but on the EU elections point they would presumably only need something passed to hold them if article 50 or something else the government passed since the referendum had stopped them* as I assume they just automatically ran on the European parliamentary timetable without input from the house of commons usually...
*Which another assumption the government originally hoped would be us agree the withdrawal agreement before the elections.
All guesswork no knowledge.
The EU election issue is a distraction, I think. They could be managed much more easily than any alternative deal which required our holding them could be arranged.
Also partially in response to Big G
My other guess would be along the lines of Edmund, EU doesn't want no deal, euro elections are the only requirement otherwise Ireland has a big problem and the EU have their back. Macron will talk tough but the 27 will come to a position of extension just for Euro elections.
It is the British side that is the bigger potential problems, say if May wanted no deal.
And it is ridiculous “Parliament” criticising May for not following an “alternative” course when they won’t even give her an alternative course to reject to follow.
Nail. Head.
May refused to give them an alternative until she was forced to do so just a few days ago.
She’s tried to dictate the whole process from the beginning. If it wasn’t for Gina Miller, Parliament would not have been asked at all.
And when she did offer alternatives they rejected them all. Rendering your point moot.
Gina Miller really has a lot to answer for. But Parliament has far more to answer for.
Have a good morning.
I have zero sympathy for Theresa May. She has opted every time to operate in dictatorial secrecy.
I am going to pose a question as I do not know the answer
There is a wide held view that no deal will not happen, but that contradicts many including the EU
So, in order for no deal to be stopped
TM WDA is approved before 12th April and if not
I assume legislation is required to pass both the HOC and HOL and needs royal assent
Furthermore, is legislation required for the UK to take part in the EU elections
I am very interested in fellow posters comments and knowledge
There's an argument that Miller was based on loss of rights and only applies to enacting A50 rather than revoking it. In which case revocation is simply a matter of the PM - May or someone else put in place for such a purpose - sending a letter.
There is not the political space to revoke and in that context a referendum is the only possible alternative
Nobody who has voted against May's Deal can at this stage say they are unwilling to countenance No Deal. That's the alternative and that's what they voted for. It may not be what they intended, but intentions don't count.
I've thought this for nigh on 4 months. It's not the first choice of those saying no, but its clearly been kept alive because they say no. Which would be ok if they acknowledged there was such a risk which they think worth it, but mostly people just rail against it. It's why the butter would not melt in their mouths fanatics get my ire as people say 'oh they are not a fanatic risking everything because they want x' where x is something they like. But their intent is bit what matters.
But in any case we now know well over half the Tory MPs are no deal supporters, which is very concerning for anyone hoping Monday will lead toward a compromise option
And it is ridiculous “Parliament” criticising May for not following an “alternative” course when they won’t even give her an alternative course to reject to follow.
Nail. Head.
Not at all. It has been evident for some time - and will hopefully become clear tomorrow - that there is a majority in Parliament for a softer route to Brexit. May's delay and obfuscation have since the beginning been intended to thwart this majority from expressing itself.
It will be interesting to watch what the DUP does now the English nationalist Tory loons have abandoned them.
Whether its principle or stubborn politicking, we would all be better off if no one had to deal with the DUP.
The DUP has been honest and principled from the start. Tories should not blame the DUP for their own government's failures. Of course, the problem with the DUP is that there is no nuance, no flexibility and no compromise. How does that differ from our own dear Prime Minister with her red lines?
And it is ridiculous “Parliament” criticising May for not following an “alternative” course when they won’t even give her an alternative course to reject to follow.
Nail. Head.
Not at all. It has been evident for some time - and will hopefully become clear tomorrow - that there is a majority in Parliament for a softer route to Brexit. May's delay and obfuscation have since the beginning been intended to thwart this majority from expressing itself.
There is no majority in Parliament for anything, as has been graphically demonstrated this week. That is the whole problem.
It is ironic when you consider they insisted on voting on the Withdrawal Agreement because they didn't trust May not to mess it up, but are now the ones messing it up themselves.
Thornberry on Sophy as evasive as ever and clearly does not understand, as so many, the difference between the WDA and the PD. She wants a custom unions but that would be in the non binding PD and not the WDA and could be binned in future UK - EU negotiations
All mps and the public need to understand that on the WDA TM is correct.
Everything needed to leave the EU is in the WDA without which we do not leave
G, it is still a surrender of everything and the opposite of what was voted for. Once that is agreed the EU can do as they like in the trade discussions given UK are prisoners of the crap TM deal. Anything is better than TM's deal including WTO.
And it is ridiculous “Parliament” criticising May for not following an “alternative” course when they won’t even give her an alternative course to reject to follow.
Nail. Head.
Not at all. It has been evident for some time - and will hopefully become clear tomorrow - that there is a majority in Parliament for a softer route to Brexit. May's delay and obfuscation have since the beginning been intended to thwart this majority from expressing itself.
It will be interesting to watch what the DUP does now the English nationalist Tory loons have abandoned them.
I am going to pose a question as I do not know the answer
There is a wide held view that no deal will not happen, but that contradicts many including the EU
So, in order for no deal to be stopped
TM WDA is approved before 12th April and if not
I assume legislation is required to pass both the HOC and HOL and needs royal assent
Furthermore, is legislation required for the UK to take part in the EU elections
I am very interested in fellow posters comments and knowledge
I disclaim any knowledge, but it seems to me that even if a significant majority in the House can agree on a serious alternative to May’s WA, it would need at a minimum to be able to demonstrate to the EU that the majority is sustainable - if there were to be any chance of a further extension from the EU.
Passing legislation into law without the co-operation of the government simply isnt going to happen in the next ten days. And almost certainly isn’t, even with it.
In other words, any significant alternative needs the current government’s active approval, or a new government commanding a majority in the existing parliament, by the end of the week.
Just guessing here but on the EU elections point they would presumably only need something passed to hold them if article 50 or something else the government passed since the referendum had stopped them* as I assume they just automatically ran on the European parliamentary timetable without input from the house of commons usually...
*Which another assumption the government originally hoped would be us agree the withdrawal agreement before the elections.
All guesswork no knowledge.
The EU election issue is a distraction, I think. They could be managed much more easily than any alternative deal which required our holding them could be arranged.
Also partially in response to Big G
My other guess would be along the lines of Edmund, EU doesn't want no deal, euro elections are the only requirement otherwise Ireland has a big problem and the EU have their back. Macron will talk tough but the 27 will come to a position of extension just for Euro elections.
It is the British side that is the bigger potential problems, say if May wanted no deal.
The problem is that both May and Corbyn want no deal. Which is why we have to bypass both front benches and take back control. The GNU doesn't have to do much nor last very long- a caretaker government which allows No Deal Brexit to be stopped, gives time for both parties to resolve their splits and then call an election. And if their caretaker programme does a few other useful things like scrap the FTPA and bring in STV then all the better.
For the Hamilton family, the Mayor of London is a Muslim and "this is a problem". "He's trying to ban the sale of bacon. We want him hanged and cut into pieces, "says Matilda (right).
The friendly face of English fascism. Enabled by the Tory press, Conservative politicians, Vote Leave and all the other crooks and charlatans who stir the pot of hatred for their own purposes.
The UK economy has lost 2.5% of its economy thanks to Brexit, according to this research that broadly matches others. The £360 million a week hit to public finances means the entire "Brexiteers dividend" had disappeared. We will probably continue to pay the EU anyway. And if course we haven't left yet...
In my place six jobs that were going to be created will now go to France, meaning six young people who would have had good, not fancy jobs now won't.
Load of bollocks. It's impossible to measure a road not taken.
Sure you can, by several different methodologies. I'm not massively keen on this particular one, truth be told, but it does broadly match other serious analysis. When definitively no-one invests in the UK because of Brexit and lots of people are disinvesting because of it, it comes down to a measurement of the relative loss. 2% plus is quite a lot in less than three years. It means fewer jobs and services for real people.
Does anyone know whether the Deltapoll switcharound from a seven point Tory lead to five point Labour lead is the biggest turnaround in VI polling in a single month? Seems to me very likely.
Thornberry on Sophy as evasive as ever and clearly does not understand, as so many, the difference between the WDA and the PD. She wants a custom unions but that would be in the non binding PD and not the WDA and could be binned in future UK - EU negotiations
All mps and the public need to understand that on the WDA TM is correct.
Everything needed to leave the EU is in the WDA without which we do not leave
G, it is still a surrender of everything and the opposite of what was voted for. Once that is agreed the EU can do as they like in the trade discussions given UK are prisoners of the crap TM deal. Anything is better than TM's deal including WTO.
If anything is better then let's revoke Article 50 and remain. Half the country will be upset whatever happens so lets go with the cheaper one.
And it is ridiculous “Parliament” criticising May for not following an “alternative” course when they won’t even give her an alternative course to reject to follow.
Nail. Head.
Not at all. It has been evident for some time - and will hopefully become clear tomorrow - that there is a majority in Parliament for a softer route to Brexit. May's delay and obfuscation have since the beginning been intended to thwart this majority from expressing itself.
It will be interesting to watch what the DUP does now the English nationalist Tory loons have abandoned them.
Thornberry on Sophy as evasive as ever and clearly does not understand, as so many, the difference between the WDA and the PD. She wants a custom unions but that would be in the non binding PD and not the WDA and could be binned in future UK - EU negotiations
All mps and the public need to understand that on the WDA TM is correct.
Everything needed to leave the EU is in the WDA without which we do not leave
G, it is still a surrender of everything and the opposite of what was voted for. Once that is agreed the EU can do as they like in the trade discussions given UK are prisoners of the crap TM deal. Anything is better than TM's deal including WTO.
Good morning Malc, not sure WDA is surrender with a pro Brexit UK government
I’m not convinced that’s true, but our government requesting it would seem to be the absolute minimum requirement - and that would not seem to be the existing government’s intention at all.
Agree, there has to be a request from the PM so if the government wants to crash the car they can crash the car.
I'd be a little bit surprised if they chose that since they're the people responsible for brexit not being a ludicrously disorganized shitshow, and everybody can see that they're not remotely prepared for it. If they wanted No Deal you'd think they'd at least try to buy themselves some time so they can look like they know what they're doing when it happens.
But leadership election politics can make people do things that would otherwise be irrational, so who knows.
And it is ridiculous “Parliament” criticising May for not following an “alternative” course when they won’t even give her an alternative course to reject to follow.
Nail. Head.
Not at all. It has been evident for some time - and will hopefully become clear tomorrow - that there is a majority in Parliament for a softer route to Brexit. May's delay and obfuscation have since the beginning been intended to thwart this majority from expressing itself.
It will be interesting to watch what the DUP does now the English nationalist Tory loons have abandoned them.
Whether its principle or stubborn politicking, we would all be better off if no one had to deal with the DUP.
The DUP has been honest and principled from the start. Tories should not blame the DUP for their own government's failures. Of course, the problem with the DUP is that there is no nuance, no flexibility and no compromise. How does that differ from our own dear Prime Minister with her red lines?
I never said she was blameless. And I wasnt blaming the DUP for causing the mess, I was noting the ti my mind unarguable point that if you can do things without dealing with them youd all be better off. Unfortunately the Tories do need them and failed to keep them on board, while hoping for salvation from Nandy types whose actions show that never have any intention of doing so, they just need to posture.
It shows what it thinks would have happened had we taken a different course. Balls and uncles come to mind.
PS My stories may be sh*te but they are my own work.
You have misunderstood the CER graph. The comparison is with the actual performance of a basket of other countries used to model our own economy.
Nobody is seriously claiming Brexit has aided our economy, and there’s decent enough evidence of resultant economic slowdown, yet for some reason PB’s finest wish to attack this graph?
It must truly be embarrassing to have voted for Brexit.
It must be totally embarrasing to take the CER graph at face value without delving into the source of their data. This is a fine example of cherry-picking your data.
So what? If our economy were in lock-step with the German economy, we'd have been able to join the Euro. It is you who is cherry-picking data. The deviation is real. The interpretation, or if you prefer, the speculation that this is due to Brexit could, however, be wrong.
It seems you don't understand - the figures have been selected to show that the UK is doing worse than other countries, and then hang the blame on Brexit - It is true that we are doing relatively worse than the USA - but we are growing at a comparable rate to Germany and Luxembourg. The reason why we are doing worse than the USA is due to Trump's expansionist policies - cutting taxes etc and has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that we held a referendum in 2016.
If you drag your American comparison back further in time, it should also show the damage Osborne did as Chancellor, as well as the damage Angela Merkel did as Chancellor. Austerity for the loss!
I am going to pose a question as I do not know the answer
There is a wide held view that no deal will not happen, but that contradicts many including the EU
So, in order for no deal to be stopped
TM WDA is approved before 12th April and if not
I assume legislation is required to pass both the HOC and HOL and needs royal assent
Furthermore, is legislation required for the UK to take part in the EU elections
I am very interested in fellow posters comments and knowledge
I disclaim any knowledge, but it seems to me that even if a significant majority in the House can agree on a serious alternative to May’s WA, it would need at a minimum to be able to demonstrate to the EU that the majority is sustainable - if there were to be any chance of a further extension from the EU.
Passing legislation into law without the co-operation of the government simply isnt going to happen in the next ten days. And almost certainly isn’t, even with it.
In other words, any significant alternative needs the current government’s active approval, or a new government commanding a majority in the existing parliament, by the end of the week.
Just guessing here but on the EU elections point they would presumably only need something passed to hold them if article 50 or something else the government passed since the referendum had stopped them* as I assume they just automatically ran on the European parliamentary timetable without input from the house of commons usually...
*Which another assumption the government originally hoped would be us agree the withdrawal agreement before the elections.
All guesswork no knowledge.
The EU election issue is a distraction, I think. They could be managed much more easily than any alternative deal which required our holding them could be arranged.
Others have said, I think, that it needs an SI laid before the house to set the date. And I think April 12 is (around) the time that needs to be done to meet the usual timetable of elections on May 23.
GIven the EU’s movement so far, I reckon that might slip a bit in the case of further fudge. Apart from the awkwardness of having to sack a few MEPs from our reallocated seats, an inquorate EP wouldn’t actually sit until July, I think. So we probably have until then to hold elections if it came to it.
It shows what it thinks would have happened had we taken a different course. Balls and uncles come to mind.
PS My stories may be sh*te but they are my own work.
You have misunderstood the CER graph. The comparison is with the actual performance of a basket of other countries used to model our own economy.
Nobody is seriously claiming Brexit has aided our economy, and there’s decent enough evidence of resultant economic slowdown, yet for some reason PB’s finest wish to attack this graph?
It must truly be embarrassing to have voted for Brexit.
Not at all you halfwitted cretinous blowhard, get your head out of your own butt.
Does anyone know whether the Deltapoll switcharound from a seven point Tory lead to five point Labour lead is the biggest turnaround in VI polling in a single month? Seems to me very likely.
Thornberry on Sophy as evasive as ever and clearly does not understand, as so many, the difference between the WDA and the PD. She wants a custom unions but that would be in the non binding PD and not the WDA and could be binned in future UK - EU negotiations
All mps and the public need to understand that on the WDA TM is correct.
Everything needed to leave the EU is in the WDA without which we do not leave
G, it is still a surrender of everything and the opposite of what was voted for. Once that is agreed the EU can do as they like in the trade discussions given UK are prisoners of the crap TM deal. Anything is better than TM's deal including WTO.
If anything is better then let's revoke Article 50 and remain. Half the country will be upset whatever happens so lets go with the cheaper one.
I am going to pose a question as I do not know the answer
There is a wide held view that no deal will not happen, but that contradicts many including the EU
So, in order for no deal to be stopped
TM WDA is approved before 12th April and if not
I assume legislation is required to pass both the HOC and HOL and needs royal assent
Furthermore, is legislation required for the UK to take part in the EU elections
I am very interested in fellow posters comments and knowledge
There's an argument that Miller was based on loss of rights and only applies to enacting A50 rather than revoking it. In which case revocation is simply a matter of the PM - May or someone else put in place for such a purpose - sending a letter.
There is not the political space to revoke and in that context a referendum is the only possible alternative
A long extension remains the most likely. The EU had already as good as said it would grant one, and it's the least politically damaging for most of the factions since it allows everyone to cling onto hope of their preferred eventual destination (at least for a while).
We know from last week that all this requires is a handshake between our PM and the EU Council.
Does anyone know whether the Deltapoll switcharound from a seven point Tory lead to five point Labour lead is the biggest turnaround in VI polling in a single month? Seems to me very likely.
Thornberry on Sophy as evasive as ever and clearly does not understand, as so many, the difference between the WDA and the PD. She wants a custom unions but that would be in the non binding PD and not the WDA and could be binned in future UK - EU negotiations
All mps and the public need to understand that on the WDA TM is correct.
Everything needed to leave the EU is in the WDA without which we do not leave
G, it is still a surrender of everything and the opposite of what was voted for. Once that is agreed the EU can do as they like in the trade discussions given UK are prisoners of the crap TM deal. Anything is better than TM's deal including WTO.
If anything is better then let's revoke Article 50 and remain. Half the country will be upset whatever happens so lets go with the cheaper one.
Even that is not practical or remotely likely
It's perfectly practical. You could do it in an afternoon.
Thornberry on Sophy as evasive as ever and clearly does not understand, as so many, the difference between the WDA and the PD. She wants a custom unions but that would be in the non binding PD and not the WDA and could be binned in future UK - EU negotiations
All mps and the public need to understand that on the WDA TM is correct.
Everything needed to leave the EU is in the WDA without which we do not leave
G, it is still a surrender of everything and the opposite of what was voted for. Once that is agreed the EU can do as they like in the trade discussions given UK are prisoners of the crap TM deal. Anything is better than TM's deal including WTO.
First, it’s not the opposite of what was voted for, as we would legally leave the EU. Like it or not (and I don’t, much) it fully meets the terms of the referendum vote.
And at worst, it is better than WTO, as it would enable the UK to enter that state at a later time of its own choosing, even if your, and the level headed Mr Baker’s ‘prison’ fears were to prove true.
I am going to pose a question as I do not know the answer
There is a wide held view that no deal will not happen, but that contradicts many including the EU
Just guessing here but on the EU elections point they would presumably only need something passed to hold them if article 50 or something else the government passed since the referendum had stopped them* as I assume they just automatically ran on the European parliamentary timetable without input from the house of commons usually...
*Which another assumption the government originally hoped would be us agree the withdrawal agreement before the elections.
All guesswork no knowledge.
The EU election issue is a distraction, I think. They could be managed much more easily than any alternative deal which required our holding them could be arranged.
Also partially in response to Big G
My other guess would be along the lines of Edmund, EU doesn't want no deal, euro elections are the only requirement otherwise Ireland has a big problem and the EU have their back. Macron will talk tough but the 27 will come to a position of extension just for Euro elections.
It is the British side that is the bigger potential problems, say if May wanted no deal.
The problem is that both May and Corbyn want no deal. Which is why we have to bypass both front benches and take back control. The GNU doesn't have to do much nor last very long- a caretaker government which allows No Deal Brexit to be stopped, gives time for both parties to resolve their splits and then call an election. And if their caretaker programme does a few other useful things like scrap the FTPA and bring in STV then all the better.
I think it's safe to say that the country would be much healthier now if we get meaningful voting reform. Both parties are in a permanent state of tension and paralysis as they need to keep the more extreme members onside and both are split down the middle.
If smaller parties of say:
UKIP/ERG
Remainer Tories
TIG
Momentum/Corbyanista
were able to formally exist, rather than be parties within parties, then I expect our politics would be much healthier.
And it is ridiculous “Parliament” criticising May for not following an “alternative” course when they won’t even give her an alternative course to reject to follow.
#Is she incapable of thinking up a plan B, given she had 3 years?
And it is ridiculous “Parliament” criticising May for not following an “alternative” course when they won’t even give her an alternative course to reject to follow.
Nail. Head.
Not at all. It has been evident for some time - and will hopefully become clear tomorrow - that there is a majority in Parliament for a softer route to Brexit. May's delay and obfuscation have since the beginning been intended to thwart this majority from expressing itself.
It will be interesting to watch what the DUP does now the English nationalist Tory loons have abandoned them.
Whether its principle or stubborn politicking, we would all be better off if no one had to deal with the DUP.
They represent a significant strand of opinion in one part of the UK. Like it or not.
Right. What's that got to do with anything? Corbyn represents a significant stand of opinion in a lot of the UK. So do the LDs even. Say, for sake of argument, the tiggers all propped up the Tories instead. Theyd probably be easier to deal with in such a scenario than the DUP.
The DUP are clearly very frustrating to deal with politically. Theres nothing untoward about them doing what they think is right, I'm just noting that things would run smoother if the government were not reliant on them.
They are and we have to live with that, but that they represent a strand of opinion is irrelevant to whether they are frustrating or not. If the Tories somehow managed to find others to back them in parliament the DUP could represent 100% of the opinion in NI and it would not matter .
It shows what it thinks would have happened had we taken a different course. Balls and uncles come to mind.
PS My stories may be sh*te but they are my own work.
You have misunderstood the CER graph. The comparison is with the actual performance of a basket of other countries used to model our own economy.
The implication is that but for the Brexit vote, the economy would have grown at 2.7% a year, up till the end of 2018, which seems over-optimistic.
It could be the model is wrong due to overfitting historical data. It could be the model is right but our recent weak performance is due to factors other than Brexit, which have yet to be identified.
And it is ridiculous “Parliament” criticising May for not following an “alternative” course when they won’t even give her an alternative course to reject to follow.
Nail. Head.
Not at all. It has been evident for some time - and will hopefully become clear tomorrow - that there is a majority in Parliament for a softer route to Brexit. May's delay and obfuscation have since the beginning been intended to thwart this majority from expressing itself.
It will be interesting to watch what the DUP does now the English nationalist Tory loons have abandoned them.
Whether its principle or stubborn politicking, we would all be better off if no one had to deal with the DUP.
The DUP has been honest and principled from the start. Tories should not blame the DUP for their own government's failures. Of course, the problem with the DUP is that there is no nuance, no flexibility and no compromise. How does that differ from our own dear Prime Minister with her red lines?
I never said she was blameless. And I wasnt blaming the DUP for causing the mess, I was noting the ti my mind unarguable point that if you can do things without dealing with them youd all be better off. Unfortunately the Tories do need them and failed to keep them on board, while hoping for salvation from Nandy types whose actions show that never have any intention of doing so, they just need to posture.
Poetic justice, paying bribes to cling to power and now getting their just desserts and a good shafting from their dodgy bedfellows.
And it is ridiculous “Parliament” criticising May for not following an “alternative” course when they won’t even give her an alternative course to reject to follow.
#Is she incapable of thinking up a plan B, given she had 3 years?
Yes. Because while she's a problem, the bigger problem is the party. 170 no dealers vs 130 presumed something else. That's the reason she's not dared have a plan b and put us in risk of accidental no deal rather than preparing for something
And it is ridiculous “Parliament” criticising May for not following an “alternative” course when they won’t even give her an alternative course to reject to follow.
Nail. Head.
Not at all. It has been evident for some time - and will hopefully become clear tomorrow - that there is a majority in Parliament for a softer route to Brexit. May's delay and obfuscation have since the beginning been intended to thwart this majority from expressing itself.
It will be interesting to watch what the DUP does now the English nationalist Tory loons have abandoned them.
Whether its principle or stubborn politicking, we would all be better off if no one had to deal with the DUP.
They represent a significant strand of opinion in one part of the UK. Like it or not.
Right. What's that got to do with anything? Corbyn represents a significant stand of opinion in a lot of the UK. So do the LDs even. Say, for sake of argument, the tiggers all propped up the Tories instead. Theyd probably be easier to deal with in such a scenario than the DUP.
The DUP are clearly very frustrating to deal with politically. Theres nothing untoward about them doing what they think is right, I'm just noting that things would run smoother if the government were not reliant on them.
They are and we have to live with that, but that they represent a strand of opinion is irrelevant to whether they are frustrating or not. If the Tories somehow managed to find others to back them in parliament the DUP could represent 100% of the opinion in NI and it would not matter .
And on May’s deal, they represent about a third of the opinion in NI.
It shows what it thinks would have happened had we taken a different course. Balls and uncles come to mind.
PS My stories may be sh*te but they are my own work.
You have misunderstood the CER graph. The comparison is with the actual performance of a basket of other countries used to model our own economy.
Nobody is seriously claiming Brexit has aided our economy, and there’s decent enough evidence of resultant economic slowdown, yet for some reason PB’s finest wish to attack this graph?
It must truly be embarrassing to have voted for Brexit.
Not at all you halfwitted cretinous blowhard, get your head out of your own butt.
The cretin is you.
I presume you post from an asylum as your contributions are both repetitive and demented.
Thornberry on Sophy as evasive as ever and clearly does not understand, as so many, the difference between the WDA and the PD. She wants a custom unions but that would be in the non binding PD and not the WDA and could be binned in future UK - EU negotiations
All mps and the public need to understand that on the WDA TM is correct.
Everything needed to leave the EU is in the WDA without which we do not leave
G, it is still a surrender of everything and the opposite of what was voted for. Once that is agreed the EU can do as they like in the trade discussions given UK are prisoners of the crap TM deal. Anything is better than TM's deal including WTO.
Good morning Malc, not sure WDA is surrender with a pro Brexit UK government
It is a terrible deal G, they should never have surrendered and accepted it. Anyone that had backbone would have told them where to stick it. I would have been embarrassed to bring that back to the country and would have resigned in shame before it was announced to the public.
It shows what it thinks would have happened had we taken a different course. Balls and uncles come to mind.
PS My stories may be sh*te but they are my own work.
You have misunderstood the CER graph. The comparison is with the actual performance of a basket of other countries used to model our own economy.
The implication is that but for the Brexit vote, the economy would have grown at 2.7% a year, up till the end of 2018, which seems over-optimistic.
It could be the model is wrong due to overfitting historical data. It could be the model is right but our recent weak performance is due to factors other than Brexit, which have yet to be identified.
All true. But is anyone arguing we received an economic boost ?
One other thing that seems apparent in the whole discussion about further trade agreements (and why, objectively, if not politically you do not want MPs involved in the minutiae) is that far too many don't seem to understand that, fundamentally, the reason why countries pursue free trade agreements is to be able to sell their own country's goods abroad at the most competitive prices. The quid pro quo is allowing others to sell their goods competitively, exposing their home producers to the home market to greater risk and competition.
MPs either seem to think the purpose is the opposite, or (because they depend on their voters for their jobs) are more interested in the enabling of the latter because it keeps prices down.
This is why many seem unconcerned about tieing into a permanent customs union (despite the flaw that we have to accept EU import tariffs without the benefit of the export tariffs) or are even gung ho in advocating a zero tariff import regime in the event of no deal.
Thornberry knows it. I dont like to suggest insincerity but more and more on Brexit I cannot believe on a number of issues that so many people do not understand things.
Therefore it is cover for cynical positioning. Davis, Johnson and go are the same so it's not a partisan point. And May and co did it too when trying to change a WA they knew and had said could not be changed.
I am going to pose a question as I do not know the answer
There is a wide held view that no deal will not happen, but that contradicts many including the EU
.
*Which another assumption the government originally hoped would be us agree the withdrawal agreement before the elections.
All guesswork no knowledge.
The EU election issue is a distraction, I think. They could be managed much more easily than any alternative deal which required our holding them could be arranged.
Also partially in response to Big G
My other guess would be along the lines of Edmund, EU doesn't want no deal, euro elections are the only requirement otherwise Ireland has a big problem and the EU have their back. Macron will talk tough but the 27 will come to a position of extension just for Euro elections.
It is the British side that is the bigger potential problems, say if May wanted no deal.
The problem is that both May and Corbyn want no deal. Which is why we have to bypass both front benches and take back control. The GNU doesn't have to do much nor last very long- a caretaker government which allows No Deal Brexit to be stopped, gives time for both parties to resolve their splits and then call an election. And if their caretaker programme does a few other useful things like scrap the FTPA and bring in STV then all the better.
I think it's safe to say that the country would be much healthier now if we get meaningful voting reform. Both parties are in a permanent state of tension and paralysis as they need to keep the more extreme members onside and both are split down the middle.
If smaller parties of say:
UKIP/ERG
Remainer Tories
TIG
Momentum/Corbyanista
were able to formally exist, rather than be parties within parties, then I expect our politics would be much healthier.
And it would be better for voters, with votes that make a different and campaigns that were nationwide rather than focused exclusively on marginal voters in marginal seats.
And it would be better for the country with every region properly represented and its interests having advocates inside all the principal parties
And it would be better for our politicians having some experience of how to work with others and strike a compromise.
Does anyone know whether the Deltapoll switcharound from a seven point Tory lead to five point Labour lead is the biggest turnaround in VI polling in a single month? Seems to me very likely.
Thornberry on Sophy as evasive as ever and clearly does not understand, as so many, the difference between the WDA and the PD. She wants a custom unions but that would be in the non binding PD and not the WDA and could be binned in future UK - EU negotiations
All mps and the public need to understand that on the WDA TM is correct.
Everything needed to leave the EU is in the WDA without which we do not leave
G, it is still a surrender of everything and the opposite of what was voted for. Once that is agreed the EU can do as they like in the trade discussions given UK are prisoners of the crap TM deal. Anything is better than TM's deal including WTO.
If anything is better then let's revoke Article 50 and remain. Half the country will be upset whatever happens so lets go with the cheaper one.
Even that is not practical or remotely likely
It's perfectly practical. You could do it in an afternoon.
Some people seem to have forgotten that the legal judgement on right to revoke was that it was done as something other than a tactic. The implication being that it wouldn't lead to a triggering of article 50 again after a short period.
Without a further referendum i don't think anybody could be confident of that - all it would take is a pro-Brexit government to be elected and they would likely seek to trigger on the basis of their election and the previous referendum decision.
It shows what it thinks would have happened had we taken a different course. Balls and uncles come to mind.
PS My stories may be sh*te but they are my own work.
You have misunderstood the CER graph. The comparison is with the actual performance of a basket of other countries used to model our own economy.
Nobody is seriously claiming Brexit has aided our economy, and there’s decent enough evidence of resultant economic slowdown, yet for some reason PB’s finest wish to attack this graph?
It must truly be embarrassing to have voted for Brexit.
Not at all you halfwitted cretinous blowhard, get your head out of your own butt.
The cretin is you.
I presume you post from an asylum as your contributions are both repetitive and demented.
Have you ever read the right wing bilge you post. You must be a right bundle of laughs, I would expect you to have a little moustache and like painting.
Does anyone know whether the Deltapoll switcharound from a seven point Tory lead to five point Labour lead is the biggest turnaround in VI polling in a single month? Seems to me very likely.
Thornberry on Sophy as evasive as ever and clearly does not understand, as so many, the difference between the WDA and the PD. She wants a custom unions but that would be in the non binding PD and not the WDA and could be binned in future UK - EU negotiations
All mps and the public need to understand that on the WDA TM is correct.
Everything needed to leave the EU is in the WDA without which we do not leave
G, it is still a surrender of everything and the opposite of what was voted for. Once that is agreed the EU can do as they like in the trade discussions given UK are prisoners of the crap TM deal. Anything is better than TM's deal including WTO.
If anything is better then let's revoke Article 50 and remain. Half the country will be upset whatever happens so lets go with the cheaper one.
Even that is not practical or remotely likely
It's perfectly practical. You could do it in an afternoon.
Some people seem to have forgotten that the legal judgement on right to revoke was that it was done as something other than a tactic. The implication being that it wouldn't lead to a triggering of article 50 again after a short period.
Without a further referendum i don't think anybody could be confident of that - all it would take is a pro-Brexit government to be elected and they would likely seek to trigger on the basis of their election and the previous referendum decision.
Do both. Revoke. Then set out a consensus leave position - very likely now to be something like May's WA heading for a soft CU Brexit. Then have a referendum. If the leave proposition wins, trigger A50 immediately, sign the agreement with the EU very quickly afterwards, and the two-year A50 period effectively becomes the equivalent of the transitional period the government is already proposing. At the end of the period we move into the new arrangements.
More likely, people have had enough and once stopped there will be no appetite for a resumption.
It shows what it thinks would have happened had we taken a different course. Balls and uncles come to mind.
PS My stories may be sh*te but they are my own work.
You have misunderstood the CER graph. The comparison is with the actual performance of a basket of other countries used to model our own economy.
Nobody is seriously claiming Brexit has aided our economy, and there’s decent enough evidence of resultant economic slowdown, yet for some reason PB’s finest wish to attack this graph?
It must truly be embarrassing to have voted for Brexit.
Not at all you halfwitted cretinous blowhard, get your head out of your own butt.
It shows what it thinks would have happened had we taken a different course. Balls and uncles come to mind.
PS My stories may be sh*te but they are my own work.
You have misunderstood the CER graph. The comparison is with the actual performance of a basket of other countries used to model our own economy.
Nobody is seriously claiming Brexit has aided our economy, and there’s decent enough evidence of resultant economic slowdown, yet for some reason PB’s finest wish to attack this graph?
It must truly be embarrassing to have voted for Brexit.
Not at all you halfwitted cretinous blowhard, get your head out of your own butt.
The cretin is you.
I presume you post from an asylum as your contributions are both repetitive and demented.
Have you ever read the right wing bilge you post. You must be a right bundle of laughs, I would expect you to have a little moustache and like painting.
Either you have never read any of my posts, or you have a singular definition of “right wing”.
And it is ridiculous “Parliament” criticising May for not following an “alternative” course when they won’t even give her an alternative course to reject to follow.
Nail. Head.
May refused to give them an alternative until she was forced to do so just a few days ago.
She’s tried to dictate the whole process from the beginning. If it wasn’t for Gina Miller, Parliament would not have been asked at all.
And when she did offer alternatives they rejected them all. Rendering your point moot.
Gina Miller really has a lot to answer for. But Parliament has far more to answer for.
Have a good morning.
Agreed. May's main priority has always been to construct a Brexit that best suits the Conservative Party. The interests of the 58% of us that didn't vote Conservative in 2017 don't figure at all.
Corbyn is content with that because he believes No Deal is a disaster and wants the Conservatives to fall into that trap and pay the electoral price.
Thornberry knows it. I dont like to suggest insincerity but more and more on Brexit I cannot believe on a number of issues that so many people do not understand things.
Therefore it is cover for cynical positioning. Davis, Johnson and go are the same so it's not a partisan point. And May and co did it too when trying to change a WA they knew and had said could not be changed.
Labour opposes the backstop. The essential feature of opposition to the backstop (i don't believe they can have any problem with the NI specific feature of it - ie. potential divergence between NI and the rUK) is that it might prevent us leaving the customs union without the joint agreement of the UK and the EU.
Labour favours replacing the backstop with a permanent customs union. The essential feature of which is that it prevents us leaving the customs union without the joint agreement of the UK and the EU.
For the Hamilton family, the Mayor of London is a Muslim and "this is a problem". "He's trying to ban the sale of bacon. We want him hanged and cut into pieces, "says Matilda (right).
It shows what it thinks would have happened had we taken a different course. Balls and uncles come to mind.
PS My stories may be sh*te but they are my own work.
You have misunderstood the CER graph. The comparison is with the actual performance of a basket of other countries used to model our own economy.
Nobody is seriously claiming Brexit has aided our economy, and there’s decent enough evidence of resultant economic slowdown, yet for some reason PB’s finest wish to attack this graph?
It must truly be embarrassing to have voted for Brexit.
Not at all you halfwitted cretinous blowhard, get your head out of your own butt.
Comments
Of course the House won't like being ignored, but what sanctions do they have? With the support of the DUP and Ultra-ERG she has enough protection to keep her safe for the remaining days - and Tory MPs of the "it's like the living dead in here" persuasion will have seen what happened to Grieve and think about their careers.
Which is where a National Unity Government remains the final play. Whether that is an actual government with an actual PM remains to be seen - could we see a NUG quickly take control of house business and pass it's own emergency legislation regardless of what the supposed government thinks? If it has a majority, and the supposed government does not...?
I think I have heard that many times from TM and now it looks very real
*Which another assumption the government originally hoped would be us agree the withdrawal agreement before the elections.
All guesswork no knowledge.
If Parliament was going to revolt, it should have done so several months ago.
That said, there is perhaps some value in Monday’s votes in demonstrating where we are. They might have had a great deal more value had they taken place before Christmas.
As Nigel B has implied there is no chance that any legislation to stop no deal or take part in the EU elections can pass to Royal assent by the 12th April and we all need to get real and understand the absolute danger we are in and the choice really does look like TM WDA or we are going off the cliff
It is ironic when you consider they insisted on voting on the Withdrawal Agreement because they didn't trust May not to mess it up, but are now the ones messing it up themselves.
She’s tried to dictate the whole process from the beginning. If it wasn’t for Gina Miller, Parliament would not have been asked at all.
If the Houses of Parliament fell in the Thames it would be a misfortune.
If someone were to rescue the members it would be a calamity.
https://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/sam-mcbride-forsaken-by-the-tory-right-the-dup-could-now-back-the-softest-of-brexits-1-8870908
If you want to know what CER did and how it formed its "doppelganger UK" from a basket of other countries, see https://www.cer.eu/insights/whats-cost-brexit-so-far
Gina Miller really has a lot to answer for. But Parliament has far more to answer for.
Have a good morning.
Whether its principle or stubborn politicking, we would all be better off if no one had to deal with the DUP.
My other guess would be along the lines of Edmund, EU doesn't want no deal, euro elections are the only requirement otherwise Ireland has a big problem and the EU have their back. Macron will talk tough but the 27 will come to a position of extension just for Euro elections.
It is the British side that is the bigger potential problems, say if May wanted no deal.
She has opted every time to operate in dictatorial secrecy.
But in any case we now know well over half the Tory MPs are no deal supporters, which is very concerning for anyone hoping Monday will lead toward a compromise option
Anyone who thought Johnson or Rees-Mogg were ever going to be reliable operators hasn’t been paying attention.
*An expression as accurate as the RPG series 'Final Fantasy'.
I'd be a little bit surprised if they chose that since they're the people responsible for brexit not being a ludicrously disorganized shitshow, and everybody can see that they're not remotely prepared for it. If they wanted No Deal you'd think they'd at least try to buy themselves some time so they can look like they know what they're doing when it happens.
But leadership election politics can make people do things that would otherwise be irrational, so who knows.
GIven the EU’s movement so far, I reckon that might slip a bit in the case of further fudge. Apart from the awkwardness of having to sack a few MEPs from our reallocated seats, an inquorate EP wouldn’t actually sit until July, I think. So we probably have until then to hold elections if it came to it.
We know from last week that all this requires is a handshake between our PM and the EU Council.
And at worst, it is better than WTO, as it would enable the UK to enter that state at a later time of its own choosing, even if your, and the level headed Mr Baker’s ‘prison’ fears were to prove true.
If smaller parties of say:
UKIP/ERG
Remainer Tories
TIG
Momentum/Corbyanista
were able to formally exist, rather than be parties within parties, then I expect our politics would be much healthier.
The DUP are clearly very frustrating to deal with politically. Theres nothing untoward about them doing what they think is right, I'm just noting that things would run smoother if the government were not reliant on them.
They are and we have to live with that, but that they represent a strand of opinion is irrelevant to whether they are frustrating or not. If the Tories somehow managed to find others to back them in parliament the DUP could represent 100% of the opinion in NI and it would not matter .
https://twitter.com/pmdfoster/status/1112267104437391360
I presume you post from an asylum as your contributions are both repetitive and demented.
MPs either seem to think the purpose is the opposite, or (because they depend on their voters for their jobs) are more interested in the enabling of the latter because it keeps prices down.
This is why many seem unconcerned about tieing into a permanent customs union (despite the flaw that we have to accept EU import tariffs without the benefit of the export tariffs) or are even gung ho in advocating a zero tariff import regime in the event of no deal.
Therefore it is cover for cynical positioning. Davis, Johnson and go are the same so it's not a partisan point. And May and co did it too when trying to change a WA they knew and had said could not be changed.
And it would be better for the country with every region properly represented and its interests having advocates inside all the principal parties
And it would be better for our politicians having some experience of how to work with others and strike a compromise.
Without a further referendum i don't think anybody could be confident of that - all it would take is a pro-Brexit government to be elected and they would likely seek to trigger on the basis of their election and the previous referendum decision.
More likely, people have had enough and once stopped there will be no appetite for a resumption.
'And what rough beast, its hour come round at last, Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?'
Corbyn is content with that because he believes No Deal is a disaster and wants the Conservatives to fall into that trap and pay the electoral price.
Labour favours replacing the backstop with a permanent customs union. The essential feature of which is that it prevents us leaving the customs union without the joint agreement of the UK and the EU.
Go figure.
WTF?