Come off it, Mr Eagles! You say "I suspect the Liberal Democrats would have won fewer seats in 2010 had they informed the electorate they were planning on trebling tuition fees."
As you know very well, this was the Conservative plan... and also the Labour plan, since they had pledged themselves to implement the findings of the Browne report in full, and that was what it recommended.
The Lib Dems were opposed to increasing tuition fees, but the leadership felt under pressure from the constraints of being in coalition with the malevolent Tories. And all the press is anti-Lib Dem and happily took up the spin. And the rest is history.
Cheating and lying win for the Conservatives and Labour every time!
Fascinating article on how the EU and Ireland will manage the border if UK leaves without a deal.
. . . It is rising concern that a ‘no deal’ might sooner or later become unavoidable that leads Europe’s two big political beasts to Mr Varadkar’s door to seek clarity on how the Irish border would be managed.
Because a ‘no deal’ presents the EU with a political trilemma - balancing the need to show solidarity with Ireland, while supporting the Good Friday Agreement and ‘no hard border’, and protecting the integrity of the EU single market. . . .
If you think No Deal is the outcome when a majority of MPs, the public, and the EU oppose it, I have a bridge to sell you.
Unfortunately only the MPs have a say, and there is no majority for any other course of action. There may be a notional majority for "Common Market 2.0" but half of those would only vote for it if it came with a confirmatory vote, and the other half would only support it if it doesn't.
The players in the game will find a way to avoid their most disliked outcome - No Deal.
The manifesto that saw the Tory party lose their majority?
Yeh. The one he stood under as a candidate of The Conservative and Unionist Party.
That's the one. The one the public rejected and which therefore became all but incidental to the current governing coalition.
Not a coalition. Lol.
Whatever it is the manifesto ceased to become binding after the majority was not won.
So no repeal of the fox hunting ban, no new grammar schools, no dementia tax? Just wait till all those constituency associations realise their MPs are reneging on the manifesto!
Fascinating article on how the EU and Ireland will manage the border if UK leaves without a deal.
. . . It is rising concern that a ‘no deal’ might sooner or later become unavoidable that leads Europe’s two big political beasts to Mr Varadkar’s door to seek clarity on how the Irish border would be managed.
Because a ‘no deal’ presents the EU with a political trilemma - balancing the need to show solidarity with Ireland, while supporting the Good Friday Agreement and ‘no hard border’, and protecting the integrity of the EU single market. . . .
If you think No Deal is the outcome when a majority of MPs, the public, and the EU oppose it, I have a bridge to sell you.
Unfortunately only the MPs have a say, and there is no majority for any other course of action. There may be a notional majority for "Common Market 2.0" but half of those would only vote for it if it came with a confirmatory vote, and the other half would only support it if it doesn't.
The players in the game will find a way to avoid their most disliked outcome - No Deal.
Revoke and extend beyond May are both more disliked than no deal.
Anyone who has ever been to a Tory members meeting understands that.
The MPs seem to want to make this unnecessarily complicated. A permanent Customs Union is the obvious front runner and needs to be put back into the process. There's a question as to whether a referendum should be tied to it, producing a second option. The government needs to decide whether to throw May's deal into the mix for a quasi-MV4; if they do, there's a third option. If they are willing to subject this to a referendum as well, there's a possible fourth option. No deal and revoke probably have to stay in the process to give the people on each of the spectrum something to support before their preferences are transferred. So six in total, even if the government plays ball. Even if Labour's semi-unicorn has to stay in as the official opposition's first choice, that's only seven. Five if HMG doesn't want May's deal in the field.
Surely that should be it?
'A' permanent customs union will destroy a significant proportion of our non EU trade overnight.
Presumably during the two years of our transition we would negotiate the requisite FTAs with those non EU trade partners.
Go Liam.
Why would they in "a" customs union they have access to our market anyway. The only way this works is if we're in "the" customs union
It is asymmetric if it is "a" customs union. Unless we have the accompanying FTAs. Otherwise we have to let goods in tariff free but our goods are subject to tariffs.
Well that's the point, if we signal that we intend to be in "a" customs union permanently with the EU which non-EU country that currently trades with the EU would bother signing a trade deal with us?
That's why this is a disaster idea and MPs are being complete fucking idiots about it.
Fascinating article on how the EU and Ireland will manage the border if UK leaves without a deal.
. . . It is rising concern that a ‘no deal’ might sooner or later become unavoidable that leads Europe’s two big political beasts to Mr Varadkar’s door to seek clarity on how the Irish border would be managed.
Because a ‘no deal’ presents the EU with a political trilemma - balancing the need to show solidarity with Ireland, while supporting the Good Friday Agreement and ‘no hard border’, and protecting the integrity of the EU single market. . . .
The MPs seem to want to make this unnecessarily complicated. A permanent Customs Union is the obvious front runner and needs to be put back into the process. There's a question as to whether a referendum should be tied to it, producing a second option. The government needs to decide whether to throw May's deal into the mix for a quasi-MV4; if they do, there's a third option. If they are willing to subject this to a referendum as well, there's a possible fourth option. No deal and revoke probably have to stay in the process to give the people on each of the spectrum something to support before their preferences are transferred. So six in total, even if the government plays ball. Even if Labour's semi-unicorn has to stay in as the official opposition's first choice, that's only seven. Five if HMG doesn't want May's deal in the field.
Surely that should be it?
'A' permanent customs union will destroy a significant proportion of our non EU trade overnight.
Presumably during the two years of our transition we would negotiate the requisite FTAs with those non EU trade partners.
Go Liam.
Why would they in "a" customs union they have access to our market anyway. The only way this works is if we're in "the" customs union
It is asymmetric if it is "a" customs union. Unless we have the accompanying FTAs. Otherwise we have to let goods in tariff free but our goods are subject to tariffs.
Well that's the point, if we signal that we intend to be in "a" customs union permanently with the EU which non-EU country that currently trades with the EU would bother signing a trade deal with us?
That's why this is a disaster idea and MPs are being complete fucking idiots about it.
+1
Customs union is the worst of all possible worlds.
..you might as well campaign to have the law of gravity repealed...
Don't say that. The MPs will add it as Option H...
No need. The current MPs already lack gravity.
Most of what our MPs debate can be well .. fudged (laws, money, Brexit). Immutable laws of physics rarely get brought into politics, having said that how's our future power outlook trending with all those shiny new electric cars that'll be on tap in the next 20 years..
Fascinating article on how the EU and Ireland will manage the border if UK leaves without a deal.
. . . It is rising concern that a ‘no deal’ might sooner or later become unavoidable that leads Europe’s two big political beasts to Mr Varadkar’s door to seek clarity on how the Irish border would be managed.
Because a ‘no deal’ presents the EU with a political trilemma - balancing the need to show solidarity with Ireland, while supporting the Good Friday Agreement and ‘no hard border’, and protecting the integrity of the EU single market. . . .
The manifesto that saw the Tory party lose their majority?
Yeh. The one he stood under as a candidate of The Conservative and Unionist Party.
That's the one. The one the public rejected and which therefore became all but incidental to the current governing coalition.
Not a coalition. Lol.
Whatever it is the manifesto ceased to become binding after the majority was not won.
Lol. Good pivot away from a misstep.
I can do the same, see? Good luck getting a Tory majority ever again if we sign up this illusory 2.0
What on earth are you talking about? I'm not pivoting away or towards anything. I called it a coalition. So sue me. My point was a manifesto is moot if the party promoting it doesn't get an overall majority.
But by all means get bogged down on the terminology.
The manifesto that saw the Tory party lose their majority?
Yeh. The one he stood under as a candidate of The Conservative and Unionist Party.
That's the one. The one the public rejected and which therefore became all but incidental to the current governing coalition.
Not a coalition. Lol.
Whatever it is the manifesto ceased to become binding after the majority was not won.
Lol. Good pivot away from a misstep.
I can do the same, see? Good luck getting a Tory majority ever again if we sign up this illusory 2.0
Never getting a Tory majority again would be the very definition of good luck if the past four years of chaos is anything to go by.
Low interest rates, low inflation, low unemployment. It's working very well for the working middle of the UK ta. You've got to either be very poor or very rich to consider a vote for Corbyn !
The manifesto that saw the Tory party lose their majority?
Yeh. The one he stood under as a candidate of The Conservative and Unionist Party.
That's the one. The one the public rejected and which therefore became all but incidental to the current governing coalition.
Not a coalition. Lol.
Whatever it is the manifesto ceased to become binding after the majority was not won.
Lol. Good pivot away from a misstep.
I can do the same, see? Good luck getting a Tory majority ever again if we sign up this illusory 2.0
What on earth are you talking about? I'm not pivoting away or towards anything. I called it a coalition. So sue me. My point was a manifesto is moot if the party promoting it doesn't get an overall majority.
But by all means get bogged down on the terminology.
Total claptrap. Sleaze was a big part of Major’s downfall with muppets like Hamilton and Archer doing really stupid things. Devolution was a huge vote winner for Blair. Brown’s committment to honour Tory pledges on Gov spending took away a lot of people’s concerns over the economy - until 2007 anyway. Squabbles over Europe didn’t help but they didn’t have the effect you claim.
The MPs seem to want to make this unnecessarily complicated. A permanent Customs Union is the obvious front runner and needs to be put back into the process. There's a question as to whether a referendum should be tied to it, producing a second option. The government needs to decide whether to throw May's deal into the mix for a quasi-MV4; if they do, there's a third option. If they are willing to subject this to a referendum as well, there's a possible fourth option. No deal and revoke probably have to stay in the process to give the people on each of the spectrum something to support before their preferences are transferred. So six in total, even if the government plays ball. Even if Labour's semi-unicorn has to stay in as the official opposition's first choice, that's only seven. Five if HMG doesn't want May's deal in the field.
Surely that should be it?
'A' permanent customs union will destroy a significant proportion of our non EU trade overnight.
Presumably during the two years of our transition we would negotiate the requisite FTAs with those non EU trade partners.
Go Liam.
Why would they in "a" customs union they have access to our market anyway. The only way this works is if we're in "the" customs union
It is asymmetric if it is "a" customs union. Unless we have the accompanying FTAs. Otherwise we have to let goods in tariff free but our goods are subject to tariffs.
Well that's the point, if we signal that we intend to be in "a" customs union permanently with the EU which non-EU country that currently trades with the EU would bother signing a trade deal with us?
That's why this is a disaster idea and MPs are being complete fucking idiots about it.
Maybe but, in the immortal phrase, we are where we are. It is the option that is getting the largest cross party support. We need to come up with a solution and short of CM1.0 which the voters rejected in 2016 I don't see an alternative, pragmatically.
The manifesto that saw the Tory party lose their majority?
Yeh. The one he stood under as a candidate of The Conservative and Unionist Party.
That's the one. The one the public rejected and which therefore became all but incidental to the current governing coalition.
Not a coalition. Lol.
Whatever it is the manifesto ceased to become binding after the majority was not won.
Lol. Good pivot away from a misstep.
I can do the same, see? Good luck getting a Tory majority ever again if we sign up this illusory 2.0
Never getting a Tory majority again would be the very definition of good luck if the past four years of chaos is anything to go by.
Low interest rates, low inflation, low unemployment. It's working very well for the working middle of the UK ta. You've got to either be very poor or very rich to consider a vote for Corbyn !
Indeed.
A (lefty) mate recently wondered out loud if Brexit was a right wing plot to get the Govt out of people’s hair. He said it in a tone of admiration.
The MPs seem to want to make this unnecessarily complicated. A permanent Customs Union is the obvious front runner and needs to be put back into the process. There's a question as to whether a referendum should be tied to it, producing a second option. The government needs to decide whether to throw May's deal into the mix for a quasi-MV4; if they do, there's a third option. If they are willing to subject this to a referendum as well, there's a possible fourth option. No deal and revoke probably have to stay in the process to give the people on each of the spectrum something to support before their preferences are transferred. So six in total, even if the government plays ball. Even if Labour's semi-unicorn has to stay in as the official opposition's first choice, that's only seven. Five if HMG doesn't want May's deal in the field.
Surely that should be it?
'A' permanent customs union will destroy a significant proportion of our non EU trade overnight.
Presumably during the two years of our transition we would negotiate the requisite FTAs with those non EU trade partners.
Go Liam.
Why would they in "a" customs union they have access to our market anyway. The only way this works is if we're in "the" customs union
It is asymmetric if it is "a" customs union. Unless we have the accompanying FTAs. Otherwise we have to let goods in tariff free but our goods are subject to tariffs.
Well that's the point, if we signal that we intend to be in "a" customs union permanently with the EU which non-EU country that currently trades with the EU would bother signing a trade deal with us?
That's why this is a disaster idea and MPs are being complete fucking idiots about it.
The manifesto that saw the Tory party lose their majority?
Yeh. The one he stood under as a candidate of The Conservative and Unionist Party.
That's the one. The one the public rejected and which therefore became all but incidental to the current governing coalition.
Not a coalition. Lol.
Whatever it is the manifesto ceased to become binding after the majority was not won.
Lol. Good pivot away from a misstep.
I can do the same, see? Good luck getting a Tory majority ever again if we sign up this illusory 2.0
What on earth are you talking about? I'm not pivoting away or towards anything. I called it a coalition. So sue me. My point was a manifesto is moot if the party promoting it doesn't get an overall majority.
But by all means get bogged down on the terminology.
Fascinating article on how the EU and Ireland will manage the border if UK leaves without a deal.
. . . It is rising concern that a ‘no deal’ might sooner or later become unavoidable that leads Europe’s two big political beasts to Mr Varadkar’s door to seek clarity on how the Irish border would be managed.
Because a ‘no deal’ presents the EU with a political trilemma - balancing the need to show solidarity with Ireland, while supporting the Good Friday Agreement and ‘no hard border’, and protecting the integrity of the EU single market. . . .
If you think No Deal is the outcome when a majority of MPs, the public, and the EU oppose it, I have a bridge to sell you.
Unfortunately only the MPs have a say, and there is no majority for any other course of action. There may be a notional majority for "Common Market 2.0" but half of those would only vote for it if it came with a confirmatory vote, and the other half would only support it if it doesn't.
The players in the game will find a way to avoid their most disliked outcome - No Deal.
Revoke and extend beyond May are both more disliked than no deal.
Anyone who has ever been to a Tory members meeting understands that.
Fascinating article on how the EU and Ireland will manage the border if UK leaves without a deal.
. . . It is rising concern that a ‘no deal’ might sooner or later become unavoidable that leads Europe’s two big political beasts to Mr Varadkar’s door to seek clarity on how the Irish border would be managed.
Because a ‘no deal’ presents the EU with a political trilemma - balancing the need to show solidarity with Ireland, while supporting the Good Friday Agreement and ‘no hard border’, and protecting the integrity of the EU single market. . . .
The manifesto that saw the Tory party lose their majority?
Yeh. The one he stood under as a candidate of The Conservative and Unionist Party.
That's the one. The one the public rejected and which therefore became all but incidental to the current governing coalition.
Not a coalition. Lol.
Whatever it is the manifesto ceased to become binding after the majority was not won.
Lol. Good pivot away from a misstep.
I can do the same, see? Good luck getting a Tory majority ever again if we sign up this illusory 2.0
Never getting a Tory majority again would be the very definition of good luck if the past four years of chaos is anything to go by.
Low interest rates, low inflation, low unemployment. It's working very well for the working middle of the UK ta. You've got to either be very poor or very rich to consider a vote for Corbyn !
The manifesto that saw the Tory party lose their majority?
Yeh. The one he stood under as a candidate of The Conservative and Unionist Party.
That's the one. The one the public rejected and which therefore became all but incidental to the current governing coalition.
Not a coalition. Lol.
Whatever it is the manifesto ceased to become binding after the majority was not won.
Lol. Good pivot away from a misstep.
I can do the same, see? Good luck getting a Tory majority ever again if we sign up this illusory 2.0
What on earth are you talking about? I'm not pivoting away or towards anything. I called it a coalition. So sue me. My point was a manifesto is moot if the party promoting it doesn't get an overall majority.
But by all means get bogged down on the terminology.
The thing is Boles is still voting for the PMs deal - wasn't that in the manifesto as negotiating a deal for leaving the EU? He's now simply acting on the reality that some of his colleagues are not voting for this deal and looking for an alternative - in a situation not anticipated by the manifesto.
If Boles is contradicting the manifesto then so is May and the entire government, but I rather think it is the no-dealers who are more in breach of their manifesto commitment.
The manifesto that saw the Tory party lose their majority?
Yeh. The one he stood under as a candidate of The Conservative and Unionist Party.
That's the one. The one the public rejected and which therefore became all but incidental to the current governing coalition.
Not a coalition. Lol.
Whatever it is the manifesto ceased to become binding after the majority was not won.
Lol. Good pivot away from a misstep.
I can do the same, see? Good luck getting a Tory majority ever again if we sign up this illusory 2.0
Never getting a Tory majority again would be the very definition of good luck if the past four years of chaos is anything to go by.
Low interest rates, low inflation, low unemployment. It's working very well for the working middle of the UK ta. You've got to either be very poor or very rich to consider a vote for Corbyn !
So, Gauke is pushing the (IMHO minority) view that May will be forced to accept a customs union if somehow it goes support this week (I’m doubtful myself).
Fascinating article on how the EU and Ireland will manage the border if UK leaves without a deal.
. . . It is rising concern that a ‘no deal’ might sooner or later become unavoidable that leads Europe’s two big political beasts to Mr Varadkar’s door to seek clarity on how the Irish border would be managed.
Because a ‘no deal’ presents the EU with a political trilemma - balancing the need to show solidarity with Ireland, while supporting the Good Friday Agreement and ‘no hard border’, and protecting the integrity of the EU single market. . . .
If you think No Deal is the outcome when a majority of MPs, the public, and the EU oppose it, I have a bridge to sell you.
Unfortunately only the MPs have a say, and there is no majority for any other course of action. There may be a notional majority for "Common Market 2.0" but half of those would only vote for it if it came with a confirmatory vote, and the other half would only support it if it doesn't.
The players in the game will find a way to avoid their most disliked outcome - No Deal.
Revoke and extend beyond May are both more disliked than no deal.
Anyone who has ever been to a Tory members meeting understands that.
It isn’t about the Tory party anymore.
Correct. But they still think that it is. That's the biggest problem this week.
The manifesto that saw the Tory party lose their majority?
Yeh. The one he stood under as a candidate of The Conservative and Unionist Party.
That's the one. The one the public rejected and which therefore became all but incidental to the current governing coalition.
Not a coalition. Lol.
Whatever it is the manifesto ceased to become binding after the majority was not won.
Lol. Good pivot away from a misstep.
I can do the same, see? Good luck getting a Tory majority ever again if we sign up this illusory 2.0
Never getting a Tory majority again would be the very definition of good luck if the past four years of chaos is anything to go by.
Low interest rates, low inflation, low unemployment. It's working very well for the working middle of the UK ta. You've got to either be very poor or very rich to consider a vote for Corbyn !
Your LibDem phase was very short-lived
You know what ?
I'd trade revocation for Labour not getting into power in the next 50 years
Fascinating article on how the EU and Ireland will manage the border if UK leaves without a deal.
. . . It is rising concern that a ‘no deal’ might sooner or later become unavoidable that leads Europe’s two big political beasts to Mr Varadkar’s door to seek clarity on how the Irish border would be managed.
Because a ‘no deal’ presents the EU with a political trilemma - balancing the need to show solidarity with Ireland, while supporting the Good Friday Agreement and ‘no hard border’, and protecting the integrity of the EU single market. . . .
If you think No Deal is the outcome when a majority of MPs, the public, and the EU oppose it, I have a bridge to sell you.
Unfortunately only the MPs have a say, and there is no majority for any other course of action. There may be a notional majority for "Common Market 2.0" but half of those would only vote for it if it came with a confirmatory vote, and the other half would only support it if it doesn't.
The players in the game will find a way to avoid their most disliked outcome - No Deal.
Revoke and extend beyond May are both more disliked than no deal.
Anyone who has ever been to a Tory members meeting understands that.
It isn’t about the Tory party anymore.
That’s why Brexit is failing. It’s been treated throughout as if it were a private matter for the Conservative party instead of the future of the entire country.
Fascinating article on how the EU and Ireland will manage the border if UK leaves without a deal.
. . . It is rising concern that a ‘no deal’ might sooner or later become unavoidable that leads Europe’s two big political beasts to Mr Varadkar’s door to seek clarity on how the Irish border would be managed.
Because a ‘no deal’ presents the EU with a political trilemma - balancing the need to show solidarity with Ireland, while supporting the Good Friday Agreement and ‘no hard border’, and protecting the integrity of the EU single market. . . .
The MPs seem to want to make this unnecessarily complicated. A permanent Customs Union is the obvious front runner and needs to be put back into the process. There's a question as to whether a referendum should be tied to it, producing a second option. The government needs to decide whether to throw May's deal into the mix for a quasi-MV4; if they do, there's a third option. If they are willing to subject this to a referendum as well, there's a possible fourth option. No deal and revoke probably have to stay in the process to give the people on each of the spectrum something to support before their preferences are transferred. So six in total, even if the government plays ball. Even if Labour's semi-unicorn has to stay in as the official opposition's first choice, that's only seven. Five if HMG doesn't want May's deal in the field.
Surely that should be it?
'A' permanent customs union will destroy a significant proportion of our non EU trade overnight.
Presumably during the two years of our transition we would negotiate the requisite FTAs with those non EU trade partners.
Go Liam.
Why would they in "a" customs union they have access to our market anyway. The only way this works is if we're in "the" customs union
It is asymmetric if it is "a" customs union. Unless we have the accompanying FTAs. Otherwise we have to let goods in tariff free but our goods are subject to tariffs.
Well that's the point, if we signal that we intend to be in "a" customs union permanently with the EU which non-EU country that currently trades with the EU would bother signing a trade deal with us?
That's why this is a disaster idea and MPs are being complete fucking idiots about it.
Interestingly, Switzerland in its rollover agreement offers much less the on the No Deal scenario than it does on the transition. Admittedly, the end deal in a customs union scenario might be worse than under EU membership, but it doesn't show any advantages by being outside the customs union as far as third countries are concerned. What is certain however is that the loss of EU trade will be greater than any gain, if at all, in third country trade.
The manifesto that saw the Tory party lose their majority?
Yeh. The one he stood under as a candidate of The Conservative and Unionist Party.
That's the one. The one the public rejected and which therefore became all but incidental to the current governing coalition.
Not a coalition. Lol.
Whatever it is the manifesto ceased to become binding after the majority was not won.
Lol. Good pivot away from a misstep.
I can do the same, see? Good luck getting a Tory majority ever again if we sign up this illusory 2.0
Never getting a Tory majority again would be the very definition of good luck if the past four years of chaos is anything to go by.
Low interest rates, low inflation, low unemployment. It's working very well for the working middle of the UK ta. You've got to either be very poor or very rich to consider a vote for Corbyn !
Fascinating article on how the EU and Ireland will manage the border if UK leaves without a deal.
. . . It is rising concern that a ‘no deal’ might sooner or later become unavoidable that leads Europe’s two big political beasts to Mr Varadkar’s door to seek clarity on how the Irish border would be managed.
Because a ‘no deal’ presents the EU with a political trilemma - balancing the need to show solidarity with Ireland, while supporting the Good Friday Agreement and ‘no hard border’, and protecting the integrity of the EU single market. . . .
If you think No Deal is the outcome when a majority of MPs, the public, and the EU oppose it, I have a bridge to sell you.
Unfortunately only the MPs have a say, and there is no majority for any other course of action. There may be a notional majority for "Common Market 2.0" but half of those would only vote for it if it came with a confirmatory vote, and the other half would only support it if it doesn't.
The players in the game will find a way to avoid their most disliked outcome - No Deal.
Revoke and extend beyond May are both more disliked than no deal.
Anyone who has ever been to a Tory members meeting understands that.
It isn’t about the Tory party anymore.
It is far more that no deal happens without either TM deal or at the very least the WDA, as legislation to stop it would have to go through the HOC and HOL and receive royal assent by 12th April
This was discussed this morning and it is apparent that just about everyone agrees that is impossible
Other than no deal or WDA, the UK has to consent to taking part in the EU elections in May for anything else and the path to that is very much uncertain
I fear no deal is a very high risk. It cannot be wished away, it has to be legislated away
So, Gauke is pushing the (IMHO minority) view that May will be forced to accept a customs union if somehow it goes support this week (I’m doubtful myself).
Maybe but Gauke may not be wrong, sadly. There is one report in today’s papers that if May’s deal doesn’t pass, she’ll go for a soft Brexit which will satisfy absolutely no one
Fascinating article on how the EU and Ireland will manage the border if UK leaves without a deal.
. . . It is rising concern that a ‘no deal’ might sooner or later become unavoidable that leads Europe’s two big political beasts to Mr Varadkar’s door to seek clarity on how the Irish border would be managed.
Because a ‘no deal’ presents the EU with a political trilemma - balancing the need to show solidarity with Ireland, while supporting the Good Friday Agreement and ‘no hard border’, and protecting the integrity of the EU single market. . . .
If you think No Deal is the outcome when a majority of MPs, the public, and the EU oppose it, I have a bridge to sell you.
Unfortunately only the MPs have a say, and there is no majority for any other course of action. There may be a notional majority for "Common Market 2.0" but half of those would only vote for it if it came with a confirmatory vote, and the other half would only support it if it doesn't.
The players in the game will find a way to avoid their most disliked outcome - No Deal.
Revoke and extend beyond May are both more disliked than no deal.
Anyone who has ever been to a Tory members meeting understands that.
It isn’t about the Tory party anymore.
That’s why Brexit is failing. It’s been treated throughout as if it were a private matter for the Conservative party instead of the future of the entire country.
If Brexit ends up devouring the Conservative party it will be the purest moment of political karma in British history. Their arrogance in foisting this disaster on the country in pursuit of their own interests has been breathtaking.
I scratch my head at the tariffs on beef and lamb quote. We import a lot more beef than we export and are about equal for lamb. Tariffs referred to would be on our exports - so we eat our own beef and lamb and import less to make up the balance. We don’t have to charge tariffs on our imports so our farmers don’t lose out and our food isn’t more expensive. What is the apocalyptic issue here? What have I missed?
So, Gauke is pushing the (IMHO minority) view that May will be forced to accept a customs union if somehow it goes support this week (I’m doubtful myself).
Maybe but Gauke may not be wrong, sadly. There is one report in today’s papers that if May’s deal doesn’t pass, she’ll go for a soft Brexit which will satisfy absolutely no one
It will satisfy many and possibly the majority in the HOC
The MPs seem to want to make this unnecessarily complicated. A permanent Customs Union is the obvious front runner and needs to be put back into the process. There's a question as to whether a referendum should be tied to it, producing a second option. The government needs to decide whether to throw May's deal into the mix for a quasi-MV4; if they do, there's a third option. If they are willing to subject this to a referendum as well, there's a possible fourth option. No deal and revoke probably have to stay in the process to give the people on each of the spectrum something to support before their preferences are transferred. So six in total, even if the government plays ball. Even if Labour's semi-unicorn has to stay in as the official opposition's first choice, that's only seven. Five if HMG doesn't want May's deal in the field.
Surely that should be it?
'A' permanent customs union will destroy a significant proportion of our non EU trade overnight.
Presumably during the two years of our transition we would negotiate the requisite FTAs with those non EU trade partners.
Go Liam.
Why would they in "a" customs union they have access to our market anyway. The only way this works is if we're in "the" customs union
It is asymmetric if it is "a" customs union. Unless we have the accompanying FTAs. Otherwise we have to let goods in tariff free but our goods are subject to tariffs.
Well that's the point, if we signal that we intend to be in "a" customs union permanently with the EU which non-EU country that currently trades with the EU would bother signing a trade deal with us?
That's why this is a disaster idea and MPs are being complete fucking idiots about it.
Interestingly, Switzerland in its rollover agreement offers much less the on the No Deal scenario than it does on the transition. Admittedly, the end deal in a customs union scenario might be worse than under EU membership, but it doesn't show any advantages by being outside the customs union as far as third countries are concerned. What is certain however is that the loss of EU trade will be greater than any gain, if at all, in third country trade.
At some point we have to choose from a list of unstisfactory options. Currently the EU accounts for nearly half our exports, plus there is the NI thing. We can't, in the immortal phrase, have our cake and eat it. This is the Brexit undividend. Asymmetric tariffs for those of our non-EU trading partners is one such cost.
I scratch my head at the tariffs on beef and lamb quote. We import a lot more beef than we export and are about equal for lamb. Tariffs referred to would be on our exports - so we eat our own beef and lamb and import less to make up the balance. We don’t have to charge tariffs on our imports so our farmers don’t lose out and our food isn’t more expensive. What is the apocalyptic issue here? What have I missed?
I shall need to read it now, since I honestly do not know which outcome leads to saved and which to sunk, in this context. Given how many Tories are now no dealers I don't see hopw it can be saved if the CU vote passes.
So, Gauke is pushing the (IMHO minority) view that May will be forced to accept a customs union if somehow it goes support this week (I’m doubtful myself).
Maybe but Gauke may not be wrong, sadly. There is one report in today’s papers that if May’s deal doesn’t pass, she’ll go for a soft Brexit which will satisfy absolutely no one
It will satisfy many and possibly the majority in the HOC
I do not agree with it but I accept the reality
I’d rather see the manifesto on which the Tories were elected honoured.
Fascinating article on how the EU and Ireland will manage the border if UK leaves without a deal.
. . . It is rising concern that a ‘no deal’ might sooner or later become unavoidable that leads Europe’s two big political beasts to Mr Varadkar’s door to seek clarity on how the Irish border would be managed.
Because a ‘no deal’ presents the EU with a political trilemma - balancing the need to show solidarity with Ireland, while supporting the Good Friday Agreement and ‘no hard border’, and protecting the integrity of the EU single market. . . .
If you think No Deal is the outcome when a majority of MPs, the public, and the EU oppose it, I have a bridge to sell you.
Unfortunately only the MPs have a say, and there is no majority for any other course of action. There may be a notional majority for "Common Market 2.0" but half of those would only vote for it if it came with a confirmatory vote, and the other half would only support it if it doesn't.
The players in the game will find a way to avoid their most disliked outcome - No Deal.
Revoke and extend beyond May are both more disliked than no deal.
Anyone who has ever been to a Tory members meeting understands that.
It isn’t about the Tory party anymore.
That’s why Brexit is failing. It’s been treated throughout as if it were a private matter for the Conservative party instead of the future of the entire country.
If Brexit ends up devouring the Conservative party it will be the purest moment of political karma in British history. Their arrogance in foisting this disaster on the country in pursuit of their own interests has been breathtaking.
Precisely. Never has so much been lost by so many to benefit so few.
Total claptrap. Sleaze was a big part of Major’s downfall with muppets like Hamilton and Archer doing really stupid things. Devolution was a huge vote winner for Blair. Brown’s committment to honour Tory pledges on Gov spending took away a lot of people’s concerns over the economy - until 2007 anyway. Squabbles over Europe didn’t help but they didn’t have the effect you claim.
It wasn't just squabbles though was it. Major had so much trouble with the people he called the 'bastards' he had to resign and fight a leadership contest. You might just about be able to claim that Europe itself wasn't an issue to voters. But the fights over Europe noticeably destabilised his government. And the same fate has befallen both the succeeding Tory PMs.
I scratch my head at the tariffs on beef and lamb quote. We import a lot more beef than we export and are about equal for lamb. Tariffs referred to would be on our exports - so we eat our own beef and lamb and import less to make up the balance. We don’t have to charge tariffs on our imports so our farmers don’t lose out and our food isn’t more expensive. What is the apocalyptic issue here? What have I missed?
Tariffs are paid on imports. But you’re right in that economics doesn’t exist in a vacuum and import substitution would undoubtedly happen.
So, Gauke is pushing the (IMHO minority) view that May will be forced to accept a customs union if somehow it goes support this week (I’m doubtful myself).
Maybe but Gauke may not be wrong, sadly. There is one report in today’s papers that if May’s deal doesn’t pass, she’ll go for a soft Brexit which will satisfy absolutely no one
It will satisfy many and possibly the majority in the HOC
I do not agree with it but I accept the reality
I’d rather see the manifesto on which the Tories were elected honoured.
Sometimes manifestoes cannot be honoured, sometimes u-turns are justified and/or necessary. If they simply cannot get their manifesto committment honoured something else should take it's place. Governments roll with the punches, they don't have to collapse, even on a big issue, if they cannot get their manifesto committments through.
Most of the outcomes now are not what many people will have wanted. Well, half the country wasn't going to get what it wanted anyway (although they might, if we remain), and neither will many others.
The manifesto that saw the Tory party lose their majority?
Yeh. The one he stood under as a candidate of The Conservative and Unionist Party.
That's the one. The one the public rejected and which therefore became all but incidental to the current governing coalition.
Not a coalition. Lol.
Whatever it is the manifesto ceased to become binding after the majority was not won.
Lol. Good pivot away from a misstep.
I can do the same, see? Good luck getting a Tory majority ever again if we sign up this illusory 2.0
Never getting a Tory majority again would be the very definition of good luck if the past four years of chaos is anything to go by.
Low interest rates, low inflation, low unemployment. It's working very well for the working middle of the UK ta. You've got to either be very poor or very rich to consider a vote for Corbyn !
Your LibDem phase was very short-lived
You know what ?
I'd trade revocation for Labour not getting into power in the next 50 years
[frantically searches in bag for Spell of Labour-No-Winning. Can't find it]
I shall need to read it now, since I honestly do not know which outcome leads to saved and which to sunk, in this context. Given how many Tories are now no dealers I don't see hopw it can be saved if the CU vote passes.
If you can follow the article's contorted logic you are a better man than me.
Btw, somebody needs to tell Peston that the collective noun for horses is a string, not a herd.
Fascinating article on how the EU and Ireland will manage the border if UK leaves without a deal.
. . . It is rising concern that a ‘no deal’ might sooner or later become unavoidable that leads Europe’s two big political beasts to Mr Varadkar’s door to seek clarity on how the Irish border would be managed.
Because a ‘no deal’ presents the EU with a political trilemma - balancing the need to show solidarity with Ireland, while supporting the Good Friday Agreement and ‘no hard border’, and protecting the integrity of the EU single market. . . .
If you think No Deal is the outcome when a majority of MPs, the public, and the EU oppose it, I have a bridge to sell you.
Unfortunately only the MPs have a say, and there is no majority for any other course of action. There may be a notional majority for "Common Market 2.0" but half of those would only vote for it if it came with a confirmatory vote, and the other half would only support it if it doesn't.
The players in the game will find a way to avoid their most disliked outcome - No Deal.
Revoke and extend beyond May are both more disliked than no deal.
Anyone who has ever been to a Tory members meeting understands that.
When will you lot ever understand that it's not just about what best suits the Tory party. It's been a disgrace from beginning to end
The manifesto that saw the Tory party lose their majority?
Yeh. The one he stood under as a candidate of The Conservative and Unionist Party.
That's the one. The one the public rejected and which therefore became all but incidental to the current governing coalition.
Not a coalition. Lol.
Whatever it is the manifesto ceased to become binding after the majority was not won.
Lol. Good pivot away from a misstep.
I can do the same, see? Good luck getting a Tory majority ever again if we sign up this illusory 2.0
Never getting a Tory majority again would be the very definition of good luck if the past four years of chaos is anything to go by.
Low interest rates, low inflation, low unemployment. It's working very well for the working middle of the UK ta. You've got to either be very poor or very rich to consider a vote for Corbyn !
Emaciated public services, long NHS waiting lists, benefits system in chaos, councils going bust, public transport fiascos, slow growth, productivity languishing, social care funding issues ducked, businesses moving out of Britain...
So, Gauke is pushing the (IMHO minority) view that May will be forced to accept a customs union if somehow it goes support this week (I’m doubtful myself).
Maybe but Gauke may not be wrong, sadly. There is one report in today’s papers that if May’s deal doesn’t pass, she’ll go for a soft Brexit which will satisfy absolutely no one
It will satisfy many and possibly the majority in the HOC
I do not agree with it but I accept the reality
I’d rather see the manifesto on which the Tories were elected honoured.
So would I but so many mps are taking matters into their own hands
In the end they will be accountable to their constituencies at a GE
If Brexit is softened, or not at all, the ERG ultras are the ones who shot down their own life's work
Come off it, Mr Eagles! You say "I suspect the Liberal Democrats would have won fewer seats in 2010 had they informed the electorate they were planning on trebling tuition fees."
As you know very well, this was the Conservative plan... and also the Labour plan, since they had pledged themselves to implement the findings of the Browne report in full, and that was what it recommended.
The Lib Dems were opposed to increasing tuition fees, but the leadership felt under pressure from the constraints of being in coalition with the malevolent Tories. And all the press is anti-Lib Dem and happily took up the spin. And the rest is history.
Cheating and lying win for the Conservatives and Labour every time!
So essentially, the big boys made you do it and then they ran away?
Fascinating article on how the EU and Ireland will manage the border if UK leaves without a deal.
. . . It is rising concern that a ‘no deal’ might sooner or later become unavoidable that leads Europe’s two big political beasts to Mr Varadkar’s door to seek clarity on how the Irish border would be managed.
Because a ‘no deal’ presents the EU with a political trilemma - balancing the need to show solidarity with Ireland, while supporting the Good Friday Agreement and ‘no hard border’, and protecting the integrity of the EU single market. . . .
If you think No Deal is the outcome when a majority of MPs, the public, and the EU oppose it, I have a bridge to sell you.
Unfortunately only the MPs have a say, and there is no majority for any other course of action. There may be a notional majority for "Common Market 2.0" but half of those would only vote for it if it came with a confirmatory vote, and the other half would only support it if it doesn't.
The players in the game will find a way to avoid their most disliked outcome - No Deal.
Revoke and extend beyond May are both more disliked than no deal.
Anyone who has ever been to a Tory members meeting understands that.
It isn’t about the Tory party anymore.
That’s why Brexit is failing. It’s been treated throughout as if it were a private matter for the Conservative party instead of the future of the entire country.
If Brexit ends up devouring the Conservative party it will be the purest moment of political karma in British history. Their arrogance in foisting this disaster on the country in pursuit of their own interests has been breathtaking.
Precisely. Never has so much been lost by so many to benefit so few.
A silly way of looking at it, a comforting deception even. Whatever the motivation behind it the thing being 'foisted' was requested by 17 million people, which is well more than some Tory only issue.
So, Gauke is pushing the (IMHO minority) view that May will be forced to accept a customs union if somehow it goes support this week (I’m doubtful myself).
Maybe but Gauke may not be wrong, sadly. There is one report in today’s papers that if May’s deal doesn’t pass, she’ll go for a soft Brexit which will satisfy absolutely no one
It will satisfy many and possibly the majority in the HOC
I do not agree with it but I accept the reality
I’d rather see the manifesto on which the Tories were elected honoured.
So, Gauke is pushing the (IMHO minority) view that May will be forced to accept a customs union if somehow it goes support this week (I’m doubtful myself).
Maybe but Gauke may not be wrong, sadly. There is one report in today’s papers that if May’s deal doesn’t pass, she’ll go for a soft Brexit which will satisfy absolutely no one
It will satisfy many and possibly the majority in the HOC
I do not agree with it but I accept the reality
I’d rather see the manifesto on which the Tories were elected honoured.
The MPs seem to want to make this unnecessarily complicated. A permanent Customs Union is the obvious front runner and needs to be put back into the process. There's a question as to whether a referendum should be tied to it, producing a second option. The government needs to decide whether to throw May's deal into the mix for a quasi-MV4; if they do, there's a third option. If they are willing to subject this to a referendum as well, there's a possible fourth option. No deal and revoke probably have to stay in the process to give the people on each of the spectrum something to support before their preferences are transferred. So six in total, even if the government plays ball. Even if Labour's semi-unicorn has to stay in as the official opposition's first choice, that's only seven. Five if HMG doesn't want May's deal in the field.
Surely that should be it?
'A' permanent customs union will destroy a significant proportion of our non EU trade overnight.
Presumably during the two years of our transition we would negotiate the requisite FTAs with those non EU trade partners.
Go Liam.
Why would they in "a" customs union they have access to our market anyway. The only way this works is if we're in "the" customs union
It is asymmetric if it is "a" customs union. Unless we have the accompanying FTAs. Otherwise we have to let goods in tariff free but our goods are subject to tariffs.
Well that's the point, if we signal that we intend to be in "a" customs union permanently with the EU which non-EU country that currently trades with the EU would bother signing a trade deal with us?
That's why this is a disaster idea and MPs are being complete fucking idiots about it.
Maybe but, in the immortal phrase, we are where we are. It is the option that is getting the largest cross party support. We need to come up with a solution and short of CM1.0 which the voters rejected in 2016 I don't see an alternative, pragmatically.
It's getting the most cross party support because MPs are complete idiots. The WA keeps us in all the EU trade deals for two years anyway, but unless our objective is to stay in "the" customs union we'd basically be in the worst trading position of all OECD countries.
It's something that Labour have latched on to as a stick with which to beat the government, but I'm reality we're being led up the garden path by a bunch of know nothings. Honestly, it's stuff like this that makes me want to run for office but then I remember I loathe politiciansand in the end, the suit becomes the man.
Fascinating article on how the EU and Ireland will manage the border if UK leaves without a deal.
. . . It is rising concern that a ‘no deal’ might sooner or later become unavoidable that leads Europe’s two big political beasts to Mr Varadkar’s door to seek clarity on how the Irish border would be managed.
Because a ‘no deal’ presents the EU with a political trilemma - balancing the need to show solidarity with Ireland, while supporting the Good Friday Agreement and ‘no hard border’, and protecting the integrity of the EU single market. . . .
If you think No Deal is the outcome when a majority of MPs, the public, and the EU oppose it, I have a bridge to sell you.
Unfortunately only the MPs have a say, and there is no majority for any other course of action. There may be a notional majority for "Common Market 2.0" but half of those would only vote for it if it came with a confirmatory vote, and the other half would only support it if it doesn't.
The players in the game will find a way to avoid their most disliked outcome - No Deal.
Revoke and extend beyond May are both more disliked than no deal.
Anyone who has ever been to a Tory members meeting understands that.
It isn’t about the Tory party anymore.
It is far more that no deal happens without either TM deal or at the very least the WDA, as legislation to stop it would have to go through the HOC and HOL and receive royal assent by 12th April
This was discussed this morning and it is apparent that just about everyone agrees that is impossible
Other than no deal or WDA, the UK has to consent to taking part in the EU elections in May for anything else and the path to that is very much uncertain
I fear no deal is a very high risk. It cannot be wished away, it has to be legislated away
Or revoked?
Yes, I know how disgustingly unpalatable that is considered, but it does at least lie within our own powers.
What are the chances of a total government collapse tomorrow?
Depends if there is a free vote including Cabinet members or not. I'd say low to middling, given they have been adept at finding reasons to not resign even though some are no deal backers and others would quit if no deal. Given there are already additional votes planned for Wednesday, I should think the government can last until then.
So, Gauke is pushing the (IMHO minority) view that May will be forced to accept a customs union if somehow it goes support this week (I’m doubtful myself).
Maybe but Gauke may not be wrong, sadly. There is one report in today’s papers that if May’s deal doesn’t pass, she’ll go for a soft Brexit which will satisfy absolutely no one
It will satisfy many and possibly the majority in the HOC
I do not agree with it but I accept the reality
I’d rather see the manifesto on which the Tories were elected honoured.
That's the manifesto that said:
"As we leave the European Union, we want to negotiate a new deep and special partnership with the EU, which will allow free trade between the UK and the EU’s member states. As part of the agreement we strike, we want to make sure that there are as few barriers to trade and investment as possible"
I can see why you're so angry at the no-deal Tories who have voted against Theresa May's deal. How dare they break their manifesto commitments!
So, Gauke is pushing the (IMHO minority) view that May will be forced to accept a customs union if somehow it goes support this week (I’m doubtful myself).
Maybe but Gauke may not be wrong, sadly. There is one report in today’s papers that if May’s deal doesn’t pass, she’ll go for a soft Brexit which will satisfy absolutely no one
It will satisfy many and possibly the majority in the HOC
I do not agree with it but I accept the reality
I’d rather see the manifesto on which the Tories were elected honoured.
So would I, but the Conservatives fell just short of a majority, so they need to adjust accordingly.
I shall need to read it now, since I honestly do not know which outcome leads to saved and which to sunk, in this context. Given how many Tories are now no dealers I don't see hopw it can be saved if the CU vote passes.
Well it is Pesto, so you can probably bank on the opposite happening. It was a good teaser tweet from him though!
The manifesto that saw the Tory party lose their majority?
Yeh. The one he stood under as a candidate of The Conservative and Unionist Party.
That's the one. The one the public rejected and which therefore became all but incidental to the current governing coalition.
Not a coalition. Lol.
Whatever it is the manifesto ceased to become binding after the majority was not won.
Lol. Good pivot away from a misstep.
I can do the same, see? Good luck getting a Tory majority ever again if we sign up this illusory 2.0
Never getting a Tory majority again would be the very definition of good luck if the past four years of chaos is anything to go by.
Low interest rates, low inflation, low unemployment. It's working very well for the working middle of the UK ta. You've got to either be very poor or very rich to consider a vote for Corbyn !
Your LibDem phase was very short-lived
You know what ?
I'd trade revocation for Labour not getting into power in the next 50 years
I suspect that revocation is the option most likely to get a Tory government in the near future. I can just see the party uniting to pursue Brexit and getting enough support on its back to form an administration. Actually leaving means the exact nature of the relationship with Europe becomes the number one item on the agenda. They'll never agree on that.
"We should really come out with no deal – now looking far the best option; but if we cannot achieve that, then we need to get out, now, with an interim solution that most closely resembles what the people voted for, in the knowledge that – following the PM’s decision to step down – we have at least the chance to fix it in the second phase of the negotiations."
So, Gauke is pushing the (IMHO minority) view that May will be forced to accept a customs union if somehow it goes support this week (I’m doubtful myself).
Maybe but Gauke may not be wrong, sadly. There is one report in today’s papers that if May’s deal doesn’t pass, she’ll go for a soft Brexit which will satisfy absolutely no one
It will satisfy many and possibly the majority in the HOC
I do not agree with it but I accept the reality
I’d rather see the manifesto on which the Tories were elected honoured.
Sometimes manifestoes cannot be honoured, sometimes u-turns are justified and/or necessary. If they simply cannot get their manifesto committment honoured something else should take it's place. Governments roll with the punches, they don't have to collapse, even on a big issue, if they cannot get their manifesto committments through.
Most of the outcomes now are not what many people will have wanted. Well, half the country wasn't going to get what it wanted anyway (although they might, if we remain), and neither will many others.
I seem to recall the greatest peacetime PM we’ve ever had once saying,in a different context “U turn if you want to, the lady is not for turning”. Gender aside, I feel pretty much the same about Brexit. May should have stuck to her Lancaster House speech and the manifesto. A trade deal would have been ideal but having spurned the chance to go for a Canada type deal, then no deal works.
If she can’t deliver on her manifesto she should resign. If another leader gets elected on a different manifesto commitment then that is democracy.
So, Gauke is pushing the (IMHO minority) view that May will be forced to accept a customs union if somehow it goes support this week (I’m doubtful myself).
Maybe but Gauke may not be wrong, sadly. There is one report in today’s papers that if May’s deal doesn’t pass, she’ll go for a soft Brexit which will satisfy absolutely no one
It will satisfy many and possibly the majority in the HOC
I do not agree with it but I accept the reality
I’d rather see the manifesto on which the Tories were elected honoured.
Which bit, fox hunting repeal or dementia tax?
The latter had more promise as an idea.
I agree actually - it was probably the best thing in the Tory manifesto; completely lost by piss-poor presentation.
I’d rather see the manifesto on which the Tories were elected honoured.
It didn't win a majority.
Why not the DUP manifesto?
Because the gains were made by Labour who also campaigned on a Leave platform and its the Tories who are in power albeit courtesy of the DUP who are more supportive of the Tory manifesto on Brexit than many Tories.
So, Gauke is pushing the (IMHO minority) view that May will be forced to accept a customs union if somehow it goes support this week (I’m doubtful myself).
Maybe but Gauke may not be wrong, sadly. There is one report in today’s papers that if May’s deal doesn’t pass, she’ll go for a soft Brexit which will satisfy absolutely no one
It will satisfy many and possibly the majority in the HOC
I do not agree with it but I accept the reality
I’d rather see the manifesto on which the Tories were elected honoured.
Sometimes manifestoes cannot be honoured, sometimes u-turns are justified and/or necessary. If they simply cannot get their manifesto committment honoured something else should take it's place. Governments roll with the punches, they don't have to collapse, even on a big issue, if they cannot get their manifesto committments through.
Most of the outcomes now are not what many people will have wanted. Well, half the country wasn't going to get what it wanted anyway (although they might, if we remain), and neither will many others.
I seem to recall the greatest peacetime PM we’ve ever had once saying,in a different context “U turn if you want to, the lady is not for turning”. .
Yes, and that's a pretty stupid quote, no matter how great a PM they were. You cannot always get what you promised - sometimes you don't even want to as what you promised may, completely innocently, not be as good an idea as you thought or things may have changed - and you don't resign every time you cannot get a manifesto committment through, I bet she had u-turns in her 11 years in office.
Something this big? Sure, maybe. But Thatcher's quip about not turning is just that, a quip and nothing more. People who refuse to even contemplate changing position are recklessly inflexible, it's why Corbyn's touted 'consistency' of views over decades is so worrying.
I’d rather see the manifesto on which the Tories were elected honoured.
It didn't win a majority.
Why not the DUP manifesto?
Because the gains were made by Labour who also campaigned on a Leave platform and its the Tories who are in power albeit courtesy of the DUP who are more supportive of the Tory manifesto on Brexit than many Tories.
The DUP have said they now want to remain or Common Market 2
So, Gauke is pushing the (IMHO minority) view that May will be forced to accept a customs union if somehow it goes support this week (I’m doubtful myself).
Maybe but Gauke may not be wrong, sadly. There is one report in today’s papers that if May’s deal doesn’t pass, she’ll go for a soft Brexit which will satisfy absolutely no one
It will satisfy many and possibly the majority in the HOC
I do not agree with it but I accept the reality
I’d rather see the manifesto on which the Tories were elected honoured.
So would I, but the Conservatives fell just short of a majority, so they need to adjust accordingly.
So, Gauke is pushing the (IMHO minority) view that May will be forced to accept a customs union if somehow it goes support this week (I’m doubtful myself).
Maybe but Gauke may not be wrong, sadly. There is one report in today’s papers that if May’s deal doesn’t pass, she’ll go for a soft Brexit which will satisfy absolutely no one
It will satisfy many and possibly the majority in the HOC
I do not agree with it but I accept the reality
I’d rather see the manifesto on which the Tories were elected honoured.
So would I, but the Conservatives fell just short of a majority, so they need to adjust accordingly.
With DUP support - not really.
The DUP do not support the government over Brexit.
I’d rather see the manifesto on which the Tories were elected honoured.
It didn't win a majority.
Why not the DUP manifesto?
Because the gains were made by Labour who also campaigned on a Leave platform and its the Tories who are in power albeit courtesy of the DUP who are more supportive of the Tory manifesto on Brexit than many Tories.
The DUP have said they now want to remain or Common Market 2
ERG and DUP now brexit polar opposites
You could not make it up
I haven’t seen that myself but I’ll take your word for it. Last I heard the DUP wanted a long extension before Brexit kicked in rather than the WA. Can’t blame them for that.
I scratch my head at the tariffs on beef and lamb quote. We import a lot more beef than we export and are about equal for lamb. Tariffs referred to would be on our exports - so we eat our own beef and lamb and import less to make up the balance. We don’t have to charge tariffs on our imports so our farmers don’t lose out and our food isn’t more expensive. What is the apocalyptic issue here? What have I missed?
It would require an effective ban on all meat imports, which I suspect would cause problems at the WTO. It would certainly torpedo a bunch of trade deals. It would also see higher meat prices in the UK, or lower incomes for farmers as the latter get good prices in the EU for their meat.
I’d rather see the manifesto on which the Tories were elected honoured.
It didn't win a majority.
Why not the DUP manifesto?
Because the gains were made by Labour who also campaigned on a Leave platform and its the Tories who are in power albeit courtesy of the DUP who are more supportive of the Tory manifesto on Brexit than many Tories.
How does that work? Because Labour gained seats then that means the Tory manifesto should be honoured? They’re a minority government and minority governments don’t get to do everything in their manifesto.
The big question is whether Utd will roll over on derby day to stop Liverpool winning the title. I think they might. A title for Liverpool is a living nightmare for Utd supporters. They can live with City winning it.
Yes, it's not like Man Utd need the points, is it?
Plus United fans do not want the treble equalled/superseded.
Still think they’d trade that to avoid a Scouser title.
Wouldn't we all
People say that, and I know what you mean (we’d never hear the end of it!). But City buying the league sticks in the craw and the pseudo-Scousers on here, who have no discernible connection with Merseyside, are clearly decent folk - Eagles, KLE4
I never quite understand why TSE, a proud Yorkshireman would want anything to do with a team from LANCASHIRE!!!!!
Fascinating article on how the EU and Ireland will manage the border if UK leaves without a deal.
. . . It is rising concern that a ‘no deal’ might sooner or later become unavoidable that leads Europe’s two big political beasts to Mr Varadkar’s door to seek clarity on how the Irish border would be managed.
Because a ‘no deal’ presents the EU with a political trilemma - balancing the need to show solidarity with Ireland, while supporting the Good Friday Agreement and ‘no hard border’, and protecting the integrity of the EU single market. . . .
If you think No Deal is the outcome when a majority of MPs, the public, and the EU oppose it, I have a bridge to sell you.
Unfortunately only the MPs have a say, and there is no majority for any other course of action. There may be a notional majority for "Common Market 2.0" but half of those would only vote for it if it came with a confirmatory vote, and the other half would only support it if it doesn't.
The players in the game will find a way to avoid their most disliked outcome - No Deal.
Revoke and extend beyond May are both more disliked than no deal.
Anyone who has ever been to a Tory members meeting understands that.
It isn’t about the Tory party anymore.
That’s why Brexit is failing. It’s been treated throughout as if it were a private matter for the Conservative party instead of the future of the entire country.
If Brexit ends up devouring the Conservative party it will be the purest moment of political karma in British history. Their arrogance in foisting this disaster on the country in pursuit of their own interests has been breathtaking.
Precisely. Never has so much been lost by so many to benefit so few.
A silly way of looking at it, a comforting deception even. Whatever the motivation behind it the thing being 'foisted' was requested by 17 million people, which is well more than some Tory only issue.
Brexit has diminished the UK economically, politically and socially. You may think that is what people voted for but I beg to differ.
The big question is whether Utd will roll over on derby day to stop Liverpool winning the title. I think they might. A title for Liverpool is a living nightmare for Utd supporters. They can live with City winning it.
Yes, it's not like Man Utd need the points, is it?
Plus United fans do not want the treble equalled/superseded.
Still think they’d trade that to avoid a Scouser title.
Wouldn't we all
People say that, and I know what you mean (we’d never hear the end of it!). But City buying the league sticks in the craw and the pseudo-Scousers on here, who have no discernible connection with Merseyside, are clearly decent folk - Eagles, KLE4
I never quite understand why TSE, a proud Yorkshireman would want anything to do with a team from LANCASHIRE!!!!!
I’d rather see the manifesto on which the Tories were elected honoured.
It didn't win a majority.
Why not the DUP manifesto?
Because the gains were made by Labour who also campaigned on a Leave platform and its the Tories who are in power albeit courtesy of the DUP who are more supportive of the Tory manifesto on Brexit than many Tories.
How does that work? Because Labour gained seats then that means the Tory manifesto should be honoured? They’re a minority government and minority governments don’t get to do everything in their manifesto.
I don't see how anyone can look back at that election campaign and claim in good faith that the lost majority reinforced the mandate for Brexit. May and other Tory spokespeople were explicit that other parties were not committed to Brexit and this was one of their main campaign messages.
So, Gauke is pushing the (IMHO minority) view that May will be forced to accept a customs union if somehow it goes support this week (I’m doubtful myself).
Maybe but Gauke may not be wrong, sadly. There is one report in today’s papers that if May’s deal doesn’t pass, she’ll go for a soft Brexit which will satisfy absolutely no one
It will satisfy many and possibly the majority in the HOC
I do not agree with it but I accept the reality
I’d rather see the manifesto on which the Tories were elected honoured.
Sometimes manifestoes cannot be honoured, sometimes u-turns are justified and/or necessary. If they simply cannot get their manifesto committment honoured something else should take it's place. Governments roll with the punches, they don't have to collapse, even on a big issue, if they cannot get their manifesto committments through.
Most of the outcomes now are not what many people will have wanted. Well, half the country wasn't going to get what it wanted anyway (although they might, if we remain), and neither will many others.
I seem to recall the greatest peacetime PM we’ve ever had once saying,in a different context “U turn if you want to, the lady is not for turning”. .
Yes, and that's a pretty stupid quote, no matter how great a PM they were. You cannot always get what you promised - sometimes you don't even want to as what you promised may, completely innocently, not be as good an idea as you thought or things may have changed - and you don't resign every time you cannot get a manifesto committment through, I bet she had u-turns in her 11 years in office.
Something this big? Sure, maybe. But Thatcher's quip about not turning is just that, a quip and nothing more. People who refuse to even contemplate changing position are recklessly inflexible, it's why Corbyn's touted 'consistency' of views over decades is so worrying.
Rawnesley's characteristically sharp piece in the Observer today cited exactly that feature as one of the reasons why May is likely to go down as one of the worst PM's in the last hundred years.
Interestingly he gave as the four worst to date Ramsay McDonald, Chamberlain, Eden and Cameron. Not sure of I agree with that last one, and personally I'd have Baldwin in my worst four, but am sure PBers will have plenty of opinions on the matter!
I’d rather see the manifesto on which the Tories were elected honoured.
It didn't win a majority.
Why not the DUP manifesto?
Because the gains were made by Labour who also campaigned on a Leave platform and its the Tories who are in power albeit courtesy of the DUP who are more supportive of the Tory manifesto on Brexit than many Tories.
How does that work? Because Labour gained seats then that means the Tory manifesto should be honoured? They’re a minority government and minority governments don’t get to do everything in their manifesto.
It’s only Brexit that has any time. Everything has been sacrificed for that and the DUP have supported the Tory manifesto on Brexit which didn’t include anything about a backstop.
Fascinating article on how the EU and Ireland will manage the border if UK leaves without a deal.
. . . It is rising concern that a ‘no deal’ might sooner or later become unavoidable that leads Europe’s two big political beasts to Mr Varadkar’s door to seek clarity on how the Irish border would be managed.
Because a ‘no deal’ presents the EU with a political trilemma - balancing the need to show solidarity with Ireland, while supporting the Good Friday Agreement and ‘no hard border’, and protecting the integrity of the EU single market. . . .
If you think No Deal is the outcome when a majority of MPs, the public, and the EU oppose it, I have a bridge to sell you.
Unfortunately only the MPs have a say, and there is no majority for any other course of action. There may be a notional majority for "Common Market 2.0" but half of those would only vote for it if it came with a confirmatory vote, and the other half would only support it if it doesn't.
The players in the game will find a way to avoid their most disliked outcome - No Deal.
Revoke and extend beyond May are both more disliked than no deal.
Anyone who has ever been to a Tory members meeting understands that.
It isn’t about the Tory party anymore.
That’s why Brexit is failing. It’s been treated throughout as if it were a private matter for the Conservative party instead of the future of the entire country.
If Brexit ends up devouring the Conservative party it will be the purest moment of political karma in British history. Their arrogance in foisting this disaster on the country in pursuit of their own interests has been breathtaking.
Precisely. Never has so much been lost by so many to benefit so few.
A silly way of looking at it, a comforting deception even. Whatever the motivation behind it the thing being 'foisted' was requested by 17 million people, which is well more than some Tory only issue.
Brexit has diminished the UK economically, politically and socially. You may think that is what people voted for but I beg to differ.
There was no shortage of people warning of terrors to come if people voted to leave the EU.
Comments
It's the cult of betrayal stoked by Thatcher that did the damage.
Why do you not complain that there was no referendum on the Single European Act?
https://twitter.com/PropertySpot/status/1098179419657654272
As you know very well, this was the Conservative plan... and also the Labour plan, since they had pledged themselves to implement the findings of the Browne report in full, and that was what it recommended.
The Lib Dems were opposed to increasing tuition fees, but the leadership felt under pressure from the constraints of being in coalition with the malevolent Tories. And all the press is anti-Lib Dem and happily took up the spin. And the rest is history.
Cheating and lying win for the Conservatives and Labour every time!
He can’t even get on with his Exec Ctte. Doesn’t say much about his skills as a politician, to be honest.
Au contraire, he should be flattered by that. He is worthy of much worse.
I can do the same, see? Good luck getting a Tory majority ever again if we sign up this illusory 2.0
Will Maidenhead be deselecting Theresa?
Anyone who has ever been to a Tory members meeting understands that.
That's why this is a disaster idea and MPs are being complete fucking idiots about it.
Customs union is the worst of all possible worlds.
But by all means get bogged down on the terminology.
A (lefty) mate recently wondered out loud if Brexit was a right wing plot to get the Govt out of people’s hair. He said it in a tone of admiration.
If Boles is contradicting the manifesto then so is May and the entire government, but I rather think it is the no-dealers who are more in breach of their manifesto commitment.
http://livefrombrexit.com/petitions/241584
I suspect 11 of these would resign if that happened: https://www.gov.uk/government/ministers
I'd trade revocation for Labour not getting into power in the next 50 years
https://www.writetothem.com/who?pc=S818HZ&fyr_extref=https://www.google.com/
This was discussed this morning and it is apparent that just about everyone agrees that is impossible
Other than no deal or WDA, the UK has to consent to taking part in the EU elections in May for anything else and the path to that is very much uncertain
I fear no deal is a very high risk. It cannot be wished away, it has to be legislated away
I do not agree with it but I accept the reality
Most of the outcomes now are not what many people will have wanted. Well, half the country wasn't going to get what it wanted anyway (although they might, if we remain), and neither will many others.
OH, GODSDAMMIT!
Btw, somebody needs to tell Peston that the collective noun for horses is a string, not a herd.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/03/31/tories-need-get-brexit-learn-believe-britain/
Yes it's all going so well.
In the end they will be accountable to their constituencies at a GE
If Brexit is softened, or not at all, the ERG ultras are the ones who shot down their own life's work
It's something that Labour have latched on to as a stick with which to beat the government, but I'm reality we're being led up the garden path by a bunch of know nothings. Honestly, it's stuff like this that makes me want to run for office but then I remember I loathe politiciansand in the end, the suit becomes the man.
Yes, I know how disgustingly unpalatable that is considered, but it does at least lie within our own powers.
"As we leave the European Union, we want to negotiate a new deep and special partnership with the EU, which will allow free trade between the UK and the EU’s member states. As part of the agreement we strike, we want to make sure that there are as few barriers to trade and investment as possible"
I can see why you're so angry at the no-deal Tories who have voted against Theresa May's deal. How dare they break their manifesto commitments!
Everyone but the worst sort of capitalist running dog knows that Corbyn was the true victor.
Vote totals are so last year - we shall abolish these traits of the capitalist system at the earliest opportunity!!!
Remember comrade, losing is winning and war is peace!!!
Well it is Pesto, so you can probably bank on the opposite happening. It was a good teaser tweet from him though!
Why not the DUP manifesto?
"We should really come out with no deal – now looking far the best option; but if we cannot achieve that, then we need to get out, now, with an interim solution that most closely resembles what the people voted for, in the knowledge that – following the PM’s decision to step down – we have at least the chance to fix it in the second phase of the negotiations."
If she can’t deliver on her manifesto she should resign. If another leader gets elected on a different manifesto commitment then that is democracy.
Something this big? Sure, maybe. But Thatcher's quip about not turning is just that, a quip and nothing more. People who refuse to even contemplate changing position are recklessly inflexible, it's why Corbyn's touted 'consistency' of views over decades is so worrying.
Do you understand how elections work?
ERG and DUP now brexit polar opposites
You could not make it up
https://twitter.com/NickBoles/status/1112447358976094210
I want the Tory manifesto because the Tories are in Gov so your question is one for you to answer.
Hold fast there Big_G - it can't go on for too much longer, it really can't*.
(*He says, more in hope than expectation.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4xr9-CkZZRk
Interestingly he gave as the four worst to date Ramsay McDonald, Chamberlain, Eden and Cameron. Not sure of I agree with that last one, and personally I'd have Baldwin in my worst four, but am sure PBers will have plenty of opinions on the matter!