@rcs1000 hits the nail on the head. May’s deal is a temporary Customs Union.
Anyone who votes for a permanent CU versus a temporary CU is either mischief-making (Labour), or thick (Tories).
If we *do* end up with a CU, we will be looking to relitigate it about 5 minutes later. It is not a viable outcome.
A rare point of agreement. The sad part is that we're either heading for a tough economic situation (no deal) followed by an even tougher one (Corbyn) or a tough democratic situation (revoke) followed by a nasty populist governments (could be as bad as Farage being somewhere close to power).
The PM's deal with no PD attached should have got support from the 30-40 soft brexit labour MPs but they are basically a bunch of cowards. I've given up on the ERG and hope they get expelled from the party, we need to kick every Tory MP who voted against MV3 out of the party. "Sincerely held beliefs" can take hike, no deal is not a tenable position.
What about Tory voters like myself who oppose the deal? What should we do?
Support the WDA or the HOC will take over the decisions. Indeed even that may be too late
Putting aside any Brexit preferences, a Euro Election would be politically fascinating at this juncture.
Will UKIP be able to stand every where? TIG/CUK and Farage's new party would come into play too.
I am keeping my fingers crossed we have to run them just for the drama!
I think there would be a mass boycott. My wife and I have said we would not vote in them unless by then we are clearly remaining
As is your right Big_G but I think you'll find you might be wasting your boycott. Since EU election turnout is typically mid-30s% I am not sure anyone will notice.
The fact that Police and Crime Commissioners are typically elected on turnouts of around 20% but still act as though they are seen to do a useful job and have massive public support should warn one of the dangers of abstention!
Putting aside any Brexit preferences, a Euro Election would be politically fascinating at this juncture.
Will UKIP be able to stand every where? TIG/CUK and Farage's new party would come into play too.
I am keeping my fingers crossed we have to run them just for the drama!
I think there would be a mass boycott. My wife and I have said we would not vote in them unless by then we are clearly remaining
As is your right Big_G but I think you'll find you might be wasting your boycott. Since EU election turnout is typically mid-30s% I am not sure anyone will notice.
I am sure my missing vote will not be noticed but in a wider context I would expect little enthusiasm to take part
The lack of enthusiasm will be for voting Tory or Labour. UKIP/BXT and TIG/LDs however could do very well.
@rcs1000 hits the nail on the head. May’s deal is a temporary Customs Union.
Anyone who votes for a permanent CU versus a temporary CU is either mischief-making (Labour), or thick (Tories).
If we *do* end up with a CU, we will be looking to relitigate it about 5 minutes later. It is not a viable outcome.
A rare point of agreement. The sad part is that we're either heading for a tough economic situation (no deal) followed by an even tougher one (Corbyn) or a tough democratic situation (revoke) followed by a nasty populist governments (could be as bad as Farage being somewhere close to power).
The PM's deal with no PD attached should have got support from the 30-40 soft brexit labour MPs but they are basically a bunch of cowards. I've given up on the ERG and hope they get expelled from the party, we need to kick every Tory MP who voted against MV3 out of the party. "Sincerely held beliefs" can take hike, no deal is not a tenable position.
What about Tory voters like myself who oppose the deal? What should we do?
Take a quiet moment to reflect on the life choices that led you to this point
@rcs1000 hits the nail on the head. May’s deal is a temporary Customs Union.
Anyone who votes for a permanent CU versus a temporary CU is either mischief-making (Labour), or thick (Tories).
If we *do* end up with a CU, we will be looking to relitigate it about 5 minutes later. It is not a viable outcome.
A rare point of agreement. The sad part is that we're either heading for a tough economic situation (no deal) followed by an even tougher one (Corbyn) or a tough democratic situation (revoke) followed by a nasty populist governments (could be as bad as Farage being somewhere close to power).
The PM's deal with no PD attached should have got support from the 30-40 soft brexit labour MPs but they are basically a bunch of cowards. I've given up on the ERG and hope they get expelled from the party, we need to kick every Tory MP who voted against MV3 out of the party. "Sincerely held beliefs" can take hike, no deal is not a tenable position.
What about Tory voters like myself who oppose the deal? What should we do?
My take was that she didn't have an answer and was trying, rather poorly, to dodge the question. Like many Conservatives nowadays she has made her preference based on purely political rather than practical considerations, and is trying to either mould or dismiss the realities to suit her choice.
My take was that she didn't have an answer and was trying, rather poorly, to dodge the question. Like many Conservatives nowadays she has made her preference based on purely political rather than practical considerations, and is trying to either mould or dismiss the realities to suit her choice.
@rcs1000 hits the nail on the head. May’s deal is a temporary Customs Union.
Anyone who votes for a permanent CU versus a temporary CU is either mischief-making (Labour), or thick (Tories).
If we *do* end up with a CU, we will be looking to relitigate it about 5 minutes later. It is not a viable outcome.
Without a customs union, we have no viable way of leaving the European Union. Saying Japan etc doesn't have a CU misses the point. It doesn't have a controversial land border with the continental consortium. It doesn't have the same commitment to frictionless trade with its neighbours.
Leavers should be DESPERATE for a customs union with the EU. It's the only thing that makes Brexit sort of work.
@rcs1000 hits the nail on the head. May’s deal is a temporary Customs Union.
Anyone who votes for a permanent CU versus a temporary CU is either mischief-making (Labour), or thick (Tories).
If we *do* end up with a CU, we will be looking to relitigate it about 5 minutes later. It is not a viable outcome.
A rare point of agreement. The sad part is that we're either heading for a tough economic situation (no deal) followed by an even tougher one (Corbyn) or a tough democratic situation (revoke) followed by a nasty populist governments (could be as bad as Farage being somewhere close to power).
The PM's deal with no PD attached should have got support from the 30-40 soft brexit labour MPs but they are basically a bunch of cowards. I've given up on the ERG and hope they get expelled from the party, we need to kick every Tory MP who voted against MV3 out of the party. "Sincerely held beliefs" can take hike, no deal is not a tenable position.
What about Tory voters like myself who oppose the deal? What should we do?
Support the WDA or the HOC will take over the decisions. Indeed even that may be too late
May's inability to communicate and unwillingness to bend is the reason for this mess. Perhaps with a stronger hand holding the negotiating stick we might have received a formal commitment to implement an invisible border by a certain date. But we'll now never know and have to admit where we are. She's left the party with only two paths now, the WDA or chaos.
Yes, this is surely Mrs May's biggest problem now, the prospect of cabinet resignations. It's one thing to lose a few PPSs, a minister of state here and there, but to lose cabinet ministers, especially those of the stature of Penny Mordaunt and Chris Grayling, that would be quite another.
FWIW, my opinion is that she could survive losing either one of Mordaunt or Grayling, but not both. If the two of them walk together, no doubt backed up with a powerful joint letter to the Daily Express, that spells the end of soft Brexit as a realistic possibility, and quite possibly the end of this government.
@rcs1000 hits the nail on the head. May’s deal is a temporary Customs Union.
Anyone who votes for a permanent CU versus a temporary CU is either mischief-making (Labour), or thick (Tories).
If we *do* end up with a CU, we will be looking to relitigate it about 5 minutes later. It is not a viable outcome.
A rare point of agreement. The sad part is that we're either heading for a tough economic situation (no deal) followed by an even tougher one (Corbyn) or a tough democratic situation (revoke) followed by a nasty populist governments (could be as bad as Farage being somewhere close to power).
The PM's deal with no PD attached should have got support from the 30-40 soft brexit labour MPs but they are basically a bunch of cowards. I've given up on the ERG and hope they get expelled from the party, we need to kick every Tory MP who voted against MV3 out of the party. "Sincerely held beliefs" can take hike, no deal is not a tenable position.
I can see No Deal followed by Corbyn
Revoke followed by the complete destruction of our FPTP electoral system (where the least hated option wins) to the extent that an extreme party has power is possible but it's not as likely as the former.
Revoke with no EUref2 could see PM Farage, Remain after EUref2 PM Corbyn and Farage Leader of the Opposition. No Deal is better for the Tories the quicker the election, the longer until the election the better for Labour.
Brexit with a Deal of whatever form still the Tories' best bet
Yes, this is surely Mrs May's biggest problem now, the prospect of cabinet resignations. It's one thing to lose a few PPSs, a minister of state here and there, but to lose cabinet ministers, especially those of the stature of Penny Mordaunt and Chris Grayling, that would be quite another.
FWIW, my opinion is that she could survive losing either one of Mordaunt or Grayling, but not both. If the two of them walk together, no doubt backed up with a powerful joint letter to the Daily Express, that spells the end of soft Brexit as a realistic possibility, and quite possibly the end of this government.
"the stature of Penny Mordaunt and Chris Grayling..."
If the appetite is not there for CM2.0, the Maybot deal looks more and more like a winner. It gives us the CU, via the Backstop, but allows for the possibility of something better if the notion of 'alternative arrangements' in phase 2 proves not to be a unicorn.
Defeated 3 times, yes, but I would not write it off yet.
So after all this nonsense the government policy still appears to be May’s deal. They have learned nothing. By the end of the week we’ll be talking about MV5.
@rcs1000 hits the nail on the head. May’s deal is a temporary Customs Union.
Anyone who votes for a permanent CU versus a temporary CU is either mischief-making (Labour), or thick (Tories).
If we *do* end up with a CU, we will be looking to relitigate it about 5 minutes later. It is not a viable outcome.
A rare point of agreement. The sad part is that we're either heading for a tough economic situation (no deal) followed by an even tougher one (Corbyn) or a tough democratic situation (revoke) followed by a nasty populist governments (could be as bad as Farage being somewhere close to power).
The PM's deal with no PD attached should have got support from the 30-40 soft brexit labour MPs but they are basically a bunch of cowards. I've given up on the ERG and hope they get expelled from the party, we need to kick every Tory MP who voted against MV3 out of the party. "Sincerely held beliefs" can take hike, no deal is not a tenable position.
I can see No Deal followed by Corbyn
Revoke followed by the complete destruction of our FPTP electoral system (where the least hated option wins) to the extent that an extreme party has power is possible but it's not as likely as the former.
Revoke with no EUref2 could see PM Farage, Remain after EUref2 PM Corbyn and Farage Leader of the Opposition. No Deal is better for the Tories the quicker the election, the longer until the election the better for Labour.
Brexit with a Deal of whatever form still the Tories' best bet
Did you see yesterday's opinion poll. With Labour's antisemitism off the front pages - Labour had a 5 point lead..
When are Mercedes going to force Merkel to give us a good deal?
They all know we hold all the cards don’t they ?
It needs repeating, and so I do, that there are no upsides to Brexit. If there were any we would know about them by now. Leavers have had three years to identify them. Therefore Brexit is entirely about managing the many downsides and to select from the various poor alternatives. I realise this is a difficult conversation for Leavers, who voted to make things better, as they saw it. The current crisis stems from this contradiction and was inevitable.
@rcs1000 hits the nail on the head. May’s deal is a temporary Customs Union.
Anyone who votes for a permanent CU versus a temporary CU is either mischief-making (Labour), or thick (Tories).
If we *do* end up with a CU, we will be looking to relitigate it about 5 minutes later. It is not a viable outcome.
A rare point of agreement. The sad part is that we're either heading for a tough economic situation (no deal) followed by an even tougher one (Corbyn) or a tough democratic situation (revoke) followed by a nasty populist governments (could be as bad as Farage being somewhere close to power).
The PM's deal with no PD attached should have got support from the 30-40 soft brexit labour MPs but they are basically a bunch of cowards. I've given up on the ERG and hope they get expelled from the party, we need to kick every Tory MP who voted against MV3 out of the party. "Sincerely held beliefs" can take hike, no deal is not a tenable position.
I can see No Deal followed by Corbyn
Revoke followed by the complete destruction of our FPTP electoral system (where the least hated option wins) to the extent that an extreme party has power is possible but it's not as likely as the former.
Revoke with no EUref2 could see PM Farage, Remain after EUref2 PM Corbyn and Farage Leader of the Opposition. No Deal is better for the Tories the quicker the election, the longer until the election the better for Labour.
Brexit with a Deal of whatever form still the Tories' best bet
Did you see yesterday's opinion poll. With Labour's antisemitism off the front pages - Labour had a 5 point lead..
You cannot rely on any opinion poll at the moment. The political atmosphere is too febrile. The polls could be out by 20 points either way.
Interesting - Paul Brand has just abruptly deleted his tweet that the Chief Whip assumed the interview would be broadcast after the event, hence it suddenly disappearing from my post.
When are Mercedes going to force Merkel to give us a good deal?
They all know we hold all the cards don’t they ?
It needs repeating, and so I do, that there are no upsides to Brexit. If there were any we would know about them by now. Leavers have had three years to identify them. Therefore Brexit is entirely about managing the many downsides and to select from the various poor alternatives. I realise this is a difficult conversation for Leavers, who voted to make things better, as they saw it. The current crisis stems from this contradiction and was inevitable.
There are upsides but as has oft been said ... we haven't left yet.
I saw the discussion on whether or not the Tories should be aiming to abide by their manifesto commitments from 2017 last night, so I went to have a look at how they're doing.
Key policies - Real terms increases in NHS spending reaching £8bn extra per year by 2022/23 [not on track] - Scrapping the triple-lock on the state pension after 2020, replacing it with a "double lock", rising with earnings or inflation [abandoned immediately] - Means test winter fuel payments, taking away £300 from wealthier pensioners [abandoned immediately] - Raising cost of care threshold from £23,000 to £100,000 - but include value of home in calculation of assets for home care as well as residential care [abandoned immediately] - Scrap free school lunches for infants in England, but offer free breakfasts across the primary years [abandoned] - Pump an extra £4bn into schools by 2022 [not on track] - Net migration cut to below 100,000 [not on track] - Increase the amount levied on firms employing non-EU migrant workers [not sure on this one]
Strangely, not one of these seems to have been raised by those so incensed by the idea that the Tories could fail to enact one of their manifesto commitments.
It's almost as if they're less concerned on the point of principle of enforcing manifesto commitments than on getting something they personally wanted.
When are Mercedes going to force Merkel to give us a good deal?
They all know we hold all the cards don’t they ?
It needs repeating, and so I do, that there are no upsides to Brexit. If there were any we would know about them by now. Leavers have had three years to identify them. Therefore Brexit is entirely about managing the many downsides and to select from the various poor alternatives. I realise this is a difficult conversation for Leavers, who voted to make things better, as they saw it. The current crisis stems from this contradiction and was inevitable.
There are upsides but as has oft been said ... we haven't left yet.
There hasn't really been much on the upsides of remaining - everything has been on how bad it will be to leave.
The biggest risk today is that IV2 proves to be a re-run of IV1. Although Clarke might possibly pass, it would be better to have some sort of process to narrow the options and deliver an option with more than just a narrow margin of support.
@rcs1000 hits the nail on the head. May’s deal is a temporary Customs Union.
Anyone who votes for a permanent CU versus a temporary CU is either mischief-making (Labour), or thick (Tories).
If we *do* end up with a CU, we will be looking to relitigate it about 5 minutes later. It is not a viable outcome.
A rare point of agreement. The sad part is that we're either heading for a tough economic situation (no deal) followed by an even tougher one (Corbyn) or a tough democratic situation (revoke) followed by a nasty populist governments (could be as bad as Farage being somewhere close to power).
The PM's deal with no PD attached should have got support from the 30-40 soft brexit labour MPs but they are basically a bunch of cowards. I've given up on the ERG and hope they get expelled from the party, we need to kick every Tory MP who voted against MV3 out of the party. "Sincerely held beliefs" can take hike, no deal is not a tenable position.
I can see No Deal followed by Corbyn
Revoke followed by the complete destruction of our FPTP electoral system (where the least hated option wins) to the extent that an extreme party has power is possible but it's not as likely as the former.
Revoke with no EUref2 could see PM Farage, Remain after EUref2 PM Corbyn and Farage Leader of the Opposition. No Deal is better for the Tories the quicker the election, the longer until the election the better for Labour.
Brexit with a Deal of whatever form still the Tories' best bet
@rcs1000 hits the nail on the head. May’s deal is a temporary Customs Union.
Anyone who votes for a permanent CU versus a temporary CU is either mischief-making (Labour), or thick (Tories).
If we *do* end up with a CU, we will be looking to relitigate it about 5 minutes later. It is not a viable outcome.
Without a customs union, we have no viable way of leaving the European Union. Saying Japan etc doesn't have a CU misses the point. It doesn't have a controversial land border with the continental consortium. It doesn't have the same commitment to frictionless trade with its neighbours.
Leavers should be DESPERATE for a customs union with the EU. It's the only thing that makes Brexit sort of work.
PS I am VERY confident we will end up in a deep customs union of some kind with the EU (possibly full membership), but there could be a spell of No Deal chaos first.
When are Mercedes going to force Merkel to give us a good deal?
They all know we hold all the cards don’t they ?
It needs repeating, and so I do, that there are no upsides to Brexit. If there were any we would know about them by now. Leavers have had three years to identify them. Therefore Brexit is entirely about managing the many downsides and to select from the various poor alternatives. I realise this is a difficult conversation for Leavers, who voted to make things better, as they saw it. The current crisis stems from this contradiction and was inevitable.
There’s one upside.
No Deal Brexit destroys the British Eurosceptic movement.
Within two years no one will admit to voting Leave except the mentally incapable and Russian trolls.
When are Mercedes going to force Merkel to give us a good deal?
They all know we hold all the cards don’t they ?
It needs repeating, and so I do, that there are no upsides to Brexit. If there were any we would know about them by now. Leavers have had three years to identify them. Therefore Brexit is entirely about managing the many downsides and to select from the various poor alternatives. I realise this is a difficult conversation for Leavers, who voted to make things better, as they saw it. The current crisis stems from this contradiction and was inevitable.
There are upsides but as has oft been said ... we haven't left yet.
If there were upsides they’ve been lost and dwarfed by the downsides. I remember one supposed upside was focusing power on Westminster/Whitehall. All those trade deals lined up ready to go are not quite as impressive as promised.
When are Mercedes going to force Merkel to give us a good deal?
They all know we hold all the cards don’t they ?
It needs repeating, and so I do, that there are no upsides to Brexit. If there were any we would know about them by now. Leavers have had three years to identify them. Therefore Brexit is entirely about managing the many downsides and to select from the various poor alternatives. I realise this is a difficult conversation for Leavers, who voted to make things better, as they saw it. The current crisis stems from this contradiction and was inevitable.
There’s one upside.
No Deal Brexit destroys the British Eurosceptic movement.
Within two years no one will admit to voting Leave except the mentally incapable and Russian trolls.
Unless of course it is a success. Which it likely will be as the bloody minded British public just muddle through.
Putting aside any Brexit preferences, a Euro Election would be politically fascinating at this juncture.
Will UKIP be able to stand every where? TIG/CUK and Farage's new party would come into play too.
I am keeping my fingers crossed we have to run them just for the drama!
I think there would be a mass boycott. My wife and I have said we would not vote in them unless by then we are clearly remaining
As is your right Big_G but I think you'll find you might be wasting your boycott. Since EU election turnout is typically mid-30s% I am not sure anyone will notice.
I am sure my missing vote will not be noticed but in a wider context I would expect little enthusiasm to take part
The lack of enthusiasm will be for voting Tory or Labour. UKIP/BXT and TIG/LDs however could do very well.
Yes, I too would expect a lack of enthusiasm for the Labour and Conservative Parties, but \I detect no enthusiasm for anybody else either.
"the stature of Penny Mordaunt and Chris Grayling..."
Hmmmm.
:-)
Well it's 1/4. Which is a very appropriate date on which to plump for CU without SM. Which I really hope we don't.
If it's to be Soft Brexit let's for heaven's sake go for the one which has some coherence, CM2.0. Out of political EU, stay in commercial EU. Let's not ditch the dream just for expediency.
When are Mercedes going to force Merkel to give us a good deal?
They all know we hold all the cards don’t they ?
It needs repeating, and so I do, that there are no upsides to Brexit. If there were any we would know about them by now. Leavers have had three years to identify them. Therefore Brexit is entirely about managing the many downsides and to select from the various poor alternatives. I realise this is a difficult conversation for Leavers, who voted to make things better, as they saw it. The current crisis stems from this contradiction and was inevitable.
There’s one upside.
No Deal Brexit destroys the British Eurosceptic movement.
Within two years no one will admit to voting Leave except the mentally incapable and Russian trolls.
Unless of course it is a success. Which it likely will be as the bloody minded British public just muddle through.
When are Mercedes going to force Merkel to give us a good deal?
They all know we hold all the cards don’t they ?
It needs repeating, and so I do, that there are no upsides to Brexit. If there were any we would know about them by now. Leavers have had three years to identify them. Therefore Brexit is entirely about managing the many downsides and to select from the various poor alternatives. I realise this is a difficult conversation for Leavers, who voted to make things better, as they saw it. The current crisis stems from this contradiction and was inevitable.
There’s one upside.
No Deal Brexit destroys the British Eurosceptic movement.
Within two years no one will admit to voting Leave except the mentally incapable and Russian trolls.
Unless of course it is a success. Which it likely will be as the bloody minded British public just muddle through.
How would that make it a success?
There is a strange tendency of Brexiteers to fetishise the British public as some kind of stoic master race that will gladly put up with whatever voluntary adversity the government inflicts on them.
When are Mercedes going to force Merkel to give us a good deal?
They all know we hold all the cards don’t they ?
It needs repeating, and so I do, that there are no upsides to Brexit. If there were any we would know about them by now. Leavers have had three years to identify them. Therefore Brexit is entirely about managing the many downsides and to select from the various poor alternatives. I realise this is a difficult conversation for Leavers, who voted to make things better, as they saw it. The current crisis stems from this contradiction and was inevitable.
There’s one upside.
No Deal Brexit destroys the British Eurosceptic movement.
Within two years no one will admit to voting Leave except the mentally incapable and Russian trolls.
Unless of course it is a success. Which it likely will be as the bloody minded British public just muddle through.
I suspect everyone will get behind Brexit in the national interest in exactly the same way as Farage and co did their bed to make a success of our membership of the EU.
@rcs1000 hits the nail on the head. May’s deal is a temporary Customs Union.
Anyone who votes for a permanent CU versus a temporary CU is either mischief-making (Labour), or thick (Tories).
If we *do* end up with a CU, we will be looking to relitigate it about 5 minutes later. It is not a viable outcome.
Without a customs union, we have no viable way of leaving the European Union. Saying Japan etc doesn't have a CU misses the point. It doesn't have a controversial land border with the continental consortium. It doesn't have the same commitment to frictionless trade with its neighbours.
Leavers should be DESPERATE for a customs union with the EU. It's the only thing that makes Brexit sort of work.
PS I am VERY confident we will end up in a deep customs union of some kind with the EU (possibly full membership), but there could be a spell of No Deal chaos first.
No Deal followed by rejoining means Schengen and the Euro amongst other bits.
It's why revoking is the saner option (I don't mind Schengen but I don't want to be in a currency controlled by Germany).
When are Mercedes going to force Merkel to give us a good deal?
They all know we hold all the cards don’t they ?
It needs repeating, and so I do, that there are no upsides to Brexit. If there were any we would know about them by now. Leavers have had three years to identify them. Therefore Brexit is entirely about managing the many downsides and to select from the various poor alternatives. I realise this is a difficult conversation for Leavers, who voted to make things better, as they saw it. The current crisis stems from this contradiction and was inevitable.
There’s one upside.
No Deal Brexit destroys the British Eurosceptic movement.
Within two years no one will admit to voting Leave except the mentally incapable and Russian trolls.
Unless of course it is a success. Which it likely will be as the bloody minded British public just muddle through.
The Great British public think your fantasy is for nutjobs only.
When are Mercedes going to force Merkel to give us a good deal?
They all know we hold all the cards don’t they ?
It needs repeating, and so I do, that there are no upsides to Brexit. If there were any we would know about them by now. Leavers have had three years to identify them. Therefore Brexit is entirely about managing the many downsides and to select from the various poor alternatives. I realise this is a difficult conversation for Leavers, who voted to make things better, as they saw it. The current crisis stems from this contradiction and was inevitable.
There’s one upside.
No Deal Brexit destroys the British Eurosceptic movement.
Within two years no one will admit to voting Leave except the mentally incapable and Russian trolls.
Unless of course it is a success. Which it likely will be as the bloody minded British public just muddle through.
If it's a success, that's fine. Personally I'd be delighted and cannot imagine why anyone should not be. If it is a failure, at least we have the benefits TSE mentions.
When are Mercedes going to force Merkel to give us a good deal?
They all know we hold all the cards don’t they ?
It needs repeating, and so I do, that there are no upsides to Brexit. If there were any we would know about them by now. Leavers have had three years to identify them. Therefore Brexit is entirely about managing the many downsides and to select from the various poor alternatives. I realise this is a difficult conversation for Leavers, who voted to make things better, as they saw it. The current crisis stems from this contradiction and was inevitable.
There’s one upside.
No Deal Brexit destroys the British Eurosceptic movement.
Within two years no one will admit to voting Leave except the mentally incapable and Russian trolls.
Unless of course it is a success. Which it likely will be as the bloody minded British public just muddle through.
How would that make it a success?
There is a strange tendency of Brexiteers to fetishise the British public as some kind of stoic master race that will gladly put up with whatever voluntary adversity the government inflicts on them.
When in reality people panicked when KFC screwed up their logistics for a week...
When are Mercedes going to force Merkel to give us a good deal?
They all know we hold all the cards don’t they ?
It needs repeating, and so I do, that there are no upsides to Brexit. If there were any we would know about them by now. Leavers have had three years to identify them. Therefore Brexit is entirely about managing the many downsides and to select from the various poor alternatives. I realise this is a difficult conversation for Leavers, who voted to make things better, as they saw it. The current crisis stems from this contradiction and was inevitable.
An upside, for Leavers, is that we will no longer be pooling UK sovereignty with the EU.
As a Remainer, I have never understood why people worried about this, and indeed, I suspect only a few europhobe people did before the vote was called.
The downsides massively outweigh that upside in my opinion, but I can see how some people might think it was more important than economics.
The trouble is Brexiteers told a pack of lies about other upsides, like wonderful trade deals, which don't exit. There are no economic upsides to Brexit. Indeed, I fear it will be economic Armageddon over next few years.
When are Mercedes going to force Merkel to give us a good deal?
They all know we hold all the cards don’t they ?
It needs repeating, and so I do, that there are no upsides to Brexit. If there were any we would know about them by now. Leavers have had three years to identify them. Therefore Brexit is entirely about managing the many downsides and to select from the various poor alternatives. I realise this is a difficult conversation for Leavers, who voted to make things better, as they saw it. The current crisis stems from this contradiction and was inevitable.
There’s one upside.
No Deal Brexit destroys the British Eurosceptic movement.
Within two years no one will admit to voting Leave except the mentally incapable and Russian trolls.
Unless of course it is a success. Which it likely will be as the bloody minded British public just muddle through.
People are only happy to muddle through and cope with adversity if they're committed to something. From all the polls I've seen here not more than 25-30 % of people are emotionally committed to any form of hard Brexit.
When are Mercedes going to force Merkel to give us a good deal?
They all know we hold all the cards don’t they ?
It needs repeating, and so I do, that there are no upsides to Brexit. If there were any we would know about them by now. Leavers have had three years to identify them. Therefore Brexit is entirely about managing the many downsides and to select from the various poor alternatives. I realise this is a difficult conversation for Leavers, who voted to make things better, as they saw it. The current crisis stems from this contradiction and was inevitable.
There’s one upside.
No Deal Brexit destroys the British Eurosceptic movement.
Within two years no one will admit to voting Leave except the mentally incapable and Russian trolls.
Unless of course it is a success. Which it likely will be as the bloody minded British public just muddle through.
How would that make it a success?
There is a strange tendency of Brexiteers to fetishise the British public as some kind of stoic master race that will gladly put up with whatever voluntary adversity the government inflicts on them.
Tbf that's balanced by passive aggressive threats of 'trouble' if the stamping of their tiny feet isn't listened to.
When are Mercedes going to force Merkel to give us a good deal?
They all know we hold all the cards don’t they ?
It needs repeating, and so I do, that there are no upsides to Brexit. If there were any we would know about them by now. Leavers have had three years to identify them. Therefore Brexit is entirely about managing the many downsides and to select from the various poor alternatives. I realise this is a difficult conversation for Leavers, who voted to make things better, as they saw it. The current crisis stems from this contradiction and was inevitable.
There’s one upside.
No Deal Brexit destroys the British Eurosceptic movement.
Within two years no one will admit to voting Leave except the mentally incapable and Russian trolls.
Unless of course it is a success. Which it likely will be as the bloody minded British public just muddle through.
How would that make it a success?
There is a strange tendency of Brexiteers to fetishise the British public as some kind of stoic master race that will gladly put up with whatever voluntary adversity the government inflicts on them.
I’m sure the nation that rang 999 during the great KFC shortage will be fine with sustained No Deal.
I saw the discussion on whether or not the Tories should be aiming to abide by their manifesto commitments from 2017 last night, so I went to have a look at how they're doing.
Key policies - Real terms increases in NHS spending reaching £8bn extra per year by 2022/23 [not on track] - Scrapping the triple-lock on the state pension after 2020, replacing it with a "double lock", rising with earnings or inflation [abandoned immediately] - Means test winter fuel payments, taking away £300 from wealthier pensioners [abandoned immediately] - Raising cost of care threshold from £23,000 to £100,000 - but include value of home in calculation of assets for home care as well as residential care [abandoned immediately] - Scrap free school lunches for infants in England, but offer free breakfasts across the primary years [abandoned] - Pump an extra £4bn into schools by 2022 [not on track] - Net migration cut to below 100,000 [not on track] - Increase the amount levied on firms employing non-EU migrant workers [not sure on this one]
Strangely, not one of these seems to have been raised by those so incensed by the idea that the Tories could fail to enact one of their manifesto commitments.
It's almost as if they're less concerned on the point of principle of enforcing manifesto commitments than on getting something they personally wanted.
Because abiding by the referendum result was not just a Tory pledge but a Labour one too. So there are absolutely no excuses for MPs not enacting it.
And manifesto pledges should be legally binding - all of them. If you can't deliver it then don't promise it in the first place.
When are Mercedes going to force Merkel to give us a good deal?
They all know we hold all the cards don’t they ?
It needs repeating, and so I do, that there are no upsides to Brexit. If there were any we would know about them by now. Leavers have had three years to identify them. Therefore Brexit is entirely about managing the many downsides and to select from the various poor alternatives. I realise this is a difficult conversation for Leavers, who voted to make things better, as they saw it. The current crisis stems from this contradiction and was inevitable.
There are upsides but as has oft been said ... we haven't left yet.
There hasn't really been much on the upsides of remaining - everything has been on how bad it will be to leave.
The obverse of the downsides of leaving is the upsides of remaining: frictionless trade and greater prosperity and opportunities; having a say in and influence over the rules we need to follow.
The downsides of leaving essentially are less trade and therefore less prosperity, jobs, public welfare etc; having to follow rules that we no say over; those rules increasingly being made against our interest because we don't attend the meetings where the decisions are made.
No Deal followed by rejoining means Schengen and the Euro amongst other bits.
It's why revoking is the saner option (I don't mind Schengen but I don't want to be in a currency controlled by Germany).
I doubt anyone will want the British joining the Eurozone, it has enough problems as it is. The British can use the Swedish cheat codes.
I wouldn't be surprised if Schengen membership happened *before* rejoining; If there are other member states that would rather Britain joined, they'll have more leverage in the post-no-deal negotiations than in the accession negotiations, which will probably take a long time and happen after everything has stabilized.
So the bar to judge Brexit by is repeal of the corn laws and WWII.
Hunt thinks destiny calls:
As the country steps up to its global destiny, I follow in a remarkable tradition. The first foreign secretary, Charles James Fox, abolished the slave trade. Another, George Canning, reshaped South America by helping its countries to achieve independence.
Because abiding by the referendum result was not just a Tory pledge but a Labour one too. So there are absolutely no excuses for MPs not enacting it.
And manifesto pledges should be legally binding - all of them. If you can't deliver it then don't promise it in the first place.
Traditionally the opposition manifesto resets when they lose the election, on the grounds that the voters took a look at what they were offering and told them to rethink it.
When are Mercedes going to force Merkel to give us a good deal?
They all know we hold all the cards don’t they ?
It needs repeating, and so I do, that there are no upsides to Brexit. If there were any we would know about them by now. Leavers have had three years to identify them. Therefore Brexit is entirely about managing the many downsides and to select from the various poor alternatives. I realise this is a difficult conversation for Leavers, who voted to make things better, as they saw it. The current crisis stems from this contradiction and was inevitable.
There’s one upside.
No Deal Brexit destroys the British Eurosceptic movement.
Within two years no one will admit to voting Leave except the mentally incapable and Russian trolls.
Unless of course it is a success. Which it likely will be as the bloody minded British public just muddle through.
I suspect everyone will get behind Brexit in the national interest in exactly the same way as Farage and co did their bed to make a success of our membership of the EU.
Could even be true. The great majority are not very politically engaged moderates who love their country and put up patiently with its leaders. Also an amazing number of people from elsewhere still want to live here, which is a sort of sign of something or other.
I saw the discussion on whether or not the Tories should be aiming to abide by their manifesto commitments from 2017 last night, so I went to have a look at how they're doing.
Key policies - Real terms increases in NHS spending reaching £8bn extra per year by 2022/23 [not on track] - Scrapping the triple-lock on the state pension after 2020, replacing it with a "double lock", rising with earnings or inflation [abandoned immediately] - Means test winter fuel payments, taking away £300 from wealthier pensioners [abandoned immediately] - Raising cost of care threshold from £23,000 to £100,000 - but include value of home in calculation of assets for home care as well as residential care [abandoned immediately] - Scrap free school lunches for infants in England, but offer free breakfasts across the primary years [abandoned] - Pump an extra £4bn into schools by 2022 [not on track] - Net migration cut to below 100,000 [not on track] - Increase the amount levied on firms employing non-EU migrant workers [not sure on this one]
Strangely, not one of these seems to have been raised by those so incensed by the idea that the Tories could fail to enact one of their manifesto commitments.
It's almost as if they're less concerned on the point of principle of enforcing manifesto commitments than on getting something they personally wanted.
Because abiding by the referendum result was not just a Tory pledge but a Labour one too. So there are absolutely no excuses for MPs not enacting it.
And manifesto pledges should be legally binding - all of them. If you can't deliver it then don't promise it in the first place.
Because abiding by the referendum result was not just a Tory pledge but a Labour one too. So there are absolutely no excuses for MPs not enacting it.
And manifesto pledges should be legally binding - all of them. If you can't deliver it then don't promise it in the first place.
Traditionally the opposition manifesto resets when they lose the election, on the grounds that the voters took a look at what they were offering and told them to rethink it.
Even when they get about 15% more of the vote than everyone predicted?
I saw the discussion on whether or not the Tories should be aiming to abide by their manifesto commitments from 2017 last night, so I went to have a look at how they're doing.
Key policies - Real terms increases in NHS spending reaching £8bn extra per year by 2022/23 [not on track] - Scrapping the triple-lock on the state pension after 2020, replacing it with a "double lock", rising with earnings or inflation [abandoned immediately] - Means test winter fuel payments, taking away £300 from wealthier pensioners [abandoned immediately] - Raising cost of care threshold from £23,000 to £100,000 - but include value of home in calculation of assets for home care as well as residential care [abandoned immediately] - Scrap free school lunches for infants in England, but offer free breakfasts across the primary years [abandoned] - Pump an extra £4bn into schools by 2022 [not on track] - Net migration cut to below 100,000 [not on track] - Increase the amount levied on firms employing non-EU migrant workers [not sure on this one]
Strangely, not one of these seems to have been raised by those so incensed by the idea that the Tories could fail to enact one of their manifesto commitments.
It's almost as if they're less concerned on the point of principle of enforcing manifesto commitments than on getting something they personally wanted.
Because abiding by the referendum result was not just a Tory pledge but a Labour one too. So there are absolutely no excuses for MPs not enacting it.
And manifesto pledges should be legally binding - all of them. If you can't deliver it then don't promise it in the first place.
Compare the Labour manifesto from 2017 with the one from 2015. Massive differences. No outcry - because if you do not get into Government in an election, your manifesto is void. It was rejected.
No-one other than the Tories and DUP have any compulsion or expectation to deliver any element of their earlier manifesto; they are free to come up with whatever they want for the next time round.
Manifesto pledges are not legally binding - that was clarified under UK law over a decade ago. Regardless of whether any particular individual thinks they should be so, they aren't, won't be, and never have been.
When are Mercedes going to force Merkel to give us a good deal?
They all know we hold all the cards don’t they ?
It needs repeating, and so I do, that there are no upsides to Brexit. If there were any we would know about them by now. Leavers have had three years to identify them. Therefore Brexit is entirely about managing the many downsides and to select from the various poor alternatives. I realise this is a difficult conversation for Leavers, who voted to make things better, as they saw it. The current crisis stems from this contradiction and was inevitable.
There’s one upside.
No Deal Brexit destroys the British Eurosceptic movement.
Within two years no one will admit to voting Leave except the mentally incapable and Russian trolls.
Unless of course it is a success. Which it likely will be as the bloody minded British public just muddle through.
How would that make it a success?
There is a strange tendency of Brexiteers to fetishise the British public as some kind of stoic master race that will gladly put up with whatever voluntary adversity the government inflicts on them.
When in reality people panicked when KFC screwed up their logistics for a week...
KFC closing down forever would definitely be a plus!
I saw the discussion on whether or not the Tories should be aiming to abide by their manifesto commitments from 2017 last night, so I went to have a look at how they're doing.
Key policies - Real terms increases in NHS spending reaching £8bn extra per year by 2022/23 [not on track] - Scrapping the triple-lock on the state pension after 2020, replacing it with a "double lock", rising with earnings or inflation [abandoned immediately] - Means test winter fuel payments, taking away £300 from wealthier pensioners [abandoned immediately] - Raising cost of care threshold from £23,000 to £100,000 - but include value of home in calculation of assets for home care as well as residential care [abandoned immediately] - Scrap free school lunches for infants in England, but offer free breakfasts across the primary years [abandoned] - Pump an extra £4bn into schools by 2022 [not on track] - Net migration cut to below 100,000 [not on track] - Increase the amount levied on firms employing non-EU migrant workers [not sure on this one]
Strangely, not one of these seems to have been raised by those so incensed by the idea that the Tories could fail to enact one of their manifesto commitments.
It's almost as if they're less concerned on the point of principle of enforcing manifesto commitments than on getting something they personally wanted.
Because abiding by the referendum result was not just a Tory pledge but a Labour one too. So there are absolutely no excuses for MPs not enacting it.
And manifesto pledges should be legally binding - all of them. If you can't deliver it then don't promise it in the first place.
Point 1. "...there are absolutely no excuses for MPs not enacting it." Define 'it'; your definition of leaving is not univerally accepted it seems. Therein lies the problem: 'it' was never properly defined.
Point 2. "...manifesto pledges should be legally binding - all of them." What happens in a hung parliament? Should we jail politicians for not having a majority?
I saw the discussion on whether or not the Tories should be aiming to abide by their manifesto commitments from 2017 last night, so I went to have a look at how they're doing.
Key policies - Real terms increases in NHS spending reaching £8bn extra per year by 2022/23 [not on track] - Scrapping the triple-lock on the state pension after 2020, replacing it with a "double lock", rising with earnings or inflation [abandoned immediately] - Means test winter fuel payments, taking away £300 from wealthier pensioners [abandoned immediately] - Raising cost of care threshold from £23,000 to £100,000 - but include value of home in calculation of assets for home care as well as residential care [abandoned immediately] - Scrap free school lunches for infants in England, but offer free breakfasts across the primary years [abandoned] - Pump an extra £4bn into schools by 2022 [not on track] - Net migration cut to below 100,000 [not on track] - Increase the amount levied on firms employing non-EU migrant workers [not sure on this one]
Strangely, not one of these seems to have been raised by those so incensed by the idea that the Tories could fail to enact one of their manifesto commitments.
It's almost as if they're less concerned on the point of principle of enforcing manifesto commitments than on getting something they personally wanted.
Because abiding by the referendum result was not just a Tory pledge but a Labour one too. So there are absolutely no excuses for MPs not enacting it.
And manifesto pledges should be legally binding - all of them. If you can't deliver it then don't promise it in the first place.
That same logic would nicely have avoided having a Brexit referendum in the first place. If only.
I saw the discussion on whether or not the Tories should be aiming to abide by their manifesto commitments from 2017 last night, so I went to have a look at how they're doing.
Key policies - Real terms increases in NHS spending reaching £8bn extra per year by 2022/23 [not on track] - Scrapping the triple-lock on the state pension after 2020, replacing it with a "double lock", rising with earnings or inflation [abandoned immediately] - Means test winter fuel payments, taking away £300 from wealthier pensioners [abandoned immediately] - Raising cost of care threshold from £23,000 to £100,000 - but include value of home in calculation of assets for home care as well as residential care [abandoned immediately] - Scrap free school lunches for infants in England, but offer free breakfasts across the primary years [abandoned] - Pump an extra £4bn into schools by 2022 [not on track] - Net migration cut to below 100,000 [not on track] - Increase the amount levied on firms employing non-EU migrant workers [not sure on this one]
Strangely, not one of these seems to have been raised by those so incensed by the idea that the Tories could fail to enact one of their manifesto commitments.
It's almost as if they're less concerned on the point of principle of enforcing manifesto commitments than on getting something they personally wanted.
Because abiding by the referendum result was not just a Tory pledge but a Labour one too. So there are absolutely no excuses for MPs not enacting it.
And manifesto pledges should be legally binding - all of them. If you can't deliver it then don't promise it in the first place.
Yes absolutely. If there is an overall parliamentary majority. If not then it is a best efforts, everything has changed situation. How can you make it legally binding to implement a policy if the party you end up in bed with, however formally, objects to it?
When are Mercedes going to force Merkel to give us a good deal?
They all know we hold all the cards don’t they ?
It needs repeating, and so I do, that there are no upsides to Brexit. If there were any we would know about them by now. Leavers have had three years to identify them. Therefore Brexit is entirely about managing the many downsides and to select from the various poor alternatives. I realise this is a difficult conversation for Leavers, who voted to make things better, as they saw it. The current crisis stems from this contradiction and was inevitable.
There’s one upside.
No Deal Brexit destroys the British Eurosceptic movement.
Within two years no one will admit to voting Leave except the mentally incapable and Russian trolls.
Unless of course it is a success. Which it likely will be as the bloody minded British public just muddle through.
I suspect everyone will get behind Brexit in the national interest in exactly the same way as Farage and co did their bed to make a success of our membership of the EU.
Nobody has to "get behind Brexit" since Brexit is a concept/event not a physical activity people need to work on. I'm a great believer in laissez-faire and the cold reality is that it is peoples self-interest that will see us though.
Some business people may think Brexit is a terrible idea but they're going to work to ensure their own business copes fine despite Brexit. Other business people May think Brexit is a great idea and they're going to work to ensure their own business gets the benefits of Brexit. Others may not think Brexit affects them and will work to ensure their own business works because that's what they do every day anyway.
Ultimately whether people are A B or C is irrelevant. What matters is that people look after themselves. Brexit is a sideshow really.
When are Mercedes going to force Merkel to give us a good deal?
They all know we hold all the cards don’t they ?
It needs repeating, and so I do, that there are no upsides to Brexit. If there were any we would know about them by now. Leavers have had three years to identify them. Therefore Brexit is entirely about managing the many downsides and to select from the various poor alternatives. I realise this is a difficult conversation for Leavers, who voted to make things better, as they saw it. The current crisis stems from this contradiction and was inevitable.
There are upsides but as has oft been said ... we haven't left yet.
There hasn't really been much on the upsides of remaining - everything has been on how bad it will be to leave.
The obverse of the downsides of leaving is the upsides of remaining: frictionless trade and greater prosperity and opportunities; having a say in and influence over the rules we need to follow.
The downsides of leaving essentially are less trade and therefore less prosperity, jobs, public welfare etc; having to follow rules that we no say over; those rules increasingly being made against our interest because we don't attend the meetings where the decisions are made.
Those rules are increasingly being made at a level above the EU where, because of our membership of the EU, we have no voice and no seat. Leaving the EU increases, rather than decreases, our ability to shape rules and regulations.
Inside the EU we have no veto on the policy being advanced on our behalf in these organisations. The voice that speaks and the hand that votes is the EU, not us.
Outside the EU we have our own seat, our own voice and our own vote including the right to veto.
I saw the discussion on whether or not the Tories should be aiming to abide by their manifesto commitments from 2017 last night, so I went to have a look at how they're doing.
Key policies - Real terms increases in NHS spending reaching £8bn extra per year by 2022/23 [not on track] - Scrapping the triple-lock on the state pension after 2020, replacing it with a "double lock", rising with earnings or inflation [abandoned immediately] - Means test winter fuel payments, taking away £300 from wealthier pensioners [abandoned immediately] - Raising cost of care threshold from £23,000 to £100,000 - but include value of home in calculation of assets for home care as well as residential care [abandoned immediately] - Scrap free school lunches for infants in England, but offer free breakfasts across the primary years [abandoned] - Pump an extra £4bn into schools by 2022 [not on track] - Net migration cut to below 100,000 [not on track] - Increase the amount levied on firms employing non-EU migrant workers [not sure on this one]
Strangely, not one of these seems to have been raised by those so incensed by the idea that the Tories could fail to enact one of their manifesto commitments.
It's almost as if they're less concerned on the point of principle of enforcing manifesto commitments than on getting something they personally wanted.
Because abiding by the referendum result was not just a Tory pledge but a Labour one too. So there are absolutely no excuses for MPs not enacting it.
And manifesto pledges should be legally binding - all of them. If you can't deliver it then don't promise it in the first place.
Compare the Labour manifesto from 2017 with the one from 2015. Massive differences. No outcry - because if you do not get into Government in an election, your manifesto is void. It was rejected.
No-one other than the Tories and DUP have any compulsion or expectation to deliver any element of their earlier manifesto; they are free to come up with whatever they want for the next time round.
Manifesto pledges are not legally binding - that was clarified under UK law over a decade ago. Regardless of whether any particular individual thinks they should be so, they aren't, won't be, and never have been.
In any case, the Labour manifesto explicitly ruled out both No Deal and the Tory plan, and was vague beyond a commitment to seek the benefits of the single market and customs union.
Putting aside any Brexit preferences, a Euro Election would be politically fascinating at this juncture.
Will UKIP be able to stand every where? TIG/CUK and Farage's new party would come into play too.
I am keeping my fingers crossed we have to run them just for the drama!
I think there would be a mass boycott. My wife and I have said we would not vote in them unless by then we are clearly remaining
As is your right Big_G but I think you'll find you might be wasting your boycott. Since EU election turnout is typically mid-30s% I am not sure anyone will notice.
I am sure my missing vote will not be noticed but in a wider context I would expect little enthusiasm to take part
The lack of enthusiasm will be for voting Tory or Labour. UKIP/BXT and TIG/LDs however could do very well.
Yes, I too would expect a lack of enthusiasm for the Labour and Conservative Parties, but \I detect no enthusiasm for anybody else either.
I'm not so sure. But even if G is right and the turnout is low, it will be those enthused enough to turn out who will determine the result.
When are Mercedes going to force Merkel to give us a good deal?
They all know we hold all the cards don’t they ?
It needs repeating, and so I do, that there are no upsides to Brexit. If there were any we would know about them by now. Leavers have had three years to identify them. Therefore Brexit is entirely about managing the many downsides and to select from the various poor alternatives. I realise this is a difficult conversation for Leavers, who voted to make things better, as they saw it. The current crisis stems from this contradiction and was inevitable.
There are upsides but as has oft been said ... we haven't left yet.
There hasn't really been much on the upsides of remaining - everything has been on how bad it will be to leave.
The obverse of the downsides of leaving is the upsides of remaining: frictionless trade and greater prosperity and opportunities; having a say in and influence over the rules we need to follow.
The downsides of leaving essentially are less trade and therefore less prosperity, jobs, public welfare etc; having to follow rules that we no say over; those rules increasingly being made against our interest because we don't attend the meetings where the decisions are made.
Those rules are increasingly being made at a level above the EU where, because of our membership of the EU, we have no voice and no seat. Leaving the EU increases, rather than decreases, our ability to shape rules and regulations.
Inside the EU we have no veto on the policy being advanced on our behalf in these organisations. The voice that speaks and the hand that votes is the EU, not us.
Outside the EU we have our own seat, our own voice and our own vote including the right to veto.
How much say did Switzerland have in GDPR legislation?
Mr. Eagles, we're already perhaps the loosest EU member, yet the political class has integrated us so much (and been incompetent at negotiating) that leaving is nevertheless very difficult. How would a decade of more integration make it easier to leave? Why would other nations, most of whom are in or on course to join the single currency, wish to leave then when it's so difficult for a large nation not entangled in the eurozone to do so?
Meanwhile you're indicating you want us to leave (but not for a decade), yet at the same time gleeful at the prospect of the sceptical movement, as you term it, being destroyed.
Because abiding by the referendum result was not just a Tory pledge but a Labour one too. So there are absolutely no excuses for MPs not enacting it.
And manifesto pledges should be legally binding - all of them. If you can't deliver it then don't promise it in the first place.
Traditionally the opposition manifesto resets when they lose the election, on the grounds that the voters took a look at what they were offering and told them to rethink it.
The vast majority of MPs who took their seats in Parliament stood on both party and personal manifestos that they would abide by the result of the referendum.
As an aside, those of you who want PR which would lead to almost permanent minority governments or coalitions should look at what is happening now in Parliament and realise this is the future if you get your way.
One MP who is likely to back Mr Gove told The Times that the former Vote Leave leader was “75 per cent likely to run, possibly as high as 90 per cent. There’s a lot of people encouraging him to go for it — and not to join in halfway through”. This is a reference to Mr Gove’s decision to abandon his support for Boris Johnson immediately after the 2016 election and make a failed bid for the leadership himself.
Putting aside any Brexit preferences, a Euro Election would be politically fascinating at this juncture.
Will UKIP be able to stand every where? TIG/CUK and Farage's new party would come into play too.
I am keeping my fingers crossed we have to run them just for the drama!
I think there would be a mass boycott. My wife and I have said we would not vote in them unless by then we are clearly remaining
As is your right Big_G but I think you'll find you might be wasting your boycott. Since EU election turnout is typically mid-30s% I am not sure anyone will notice.
I am sure my missing vote will not be noticed but in a wider context I would expect little enthusiasm to take part
The lack of enthusiasm will be for voting Tory or Labour. UKIP/BXT and TIG/LDs however could do very well.
Yes, I too would expect a lack of enthusiasm for the Labour and Conservative Parties, but \I detect no enthusiasm for anybody else either.
I'm not so sure. But even if G is right and the turnout is low, it will be those enthused enough to turn out who will determine the result.
You could probably expect most of the 6m who signed the petition and the 0.5-1m who marched to vote... for Remainery parties.
When are Mercedes going to force Merkel to give us a good deal?
They all know we hold all the cards don’t they ?
It needs repeating, and so I do, that there are no upsides to Brexit. If there were any we would know about them by now. Leavers have had three years to identify them. Therefore Brexit is entirely about managing the many downsides and to select from the various poor alternatives. I realise this is a difficult conversation for Leavers, who voted to make things better, as they saw it. The current crisis stems from this contradiction and was inevitable.
There’s one upside.
No Deal Brexit destroys the British Eurosceptic movement.
Within two years no one will admit to voting Leave except the mentally incapable and Russian trolls.
Unless of course it is a success. Which it likely will be as the bloody minded British public just muddle through.
I suspect everyone will get behind Brexit in the national interest in exactly the same way as Farage and co did their bed to make a success of our membership of the EU.
Nobody has to "get behind Brexit" since Brexit is a concept/event not a physical activity people need to work on. I'm a great believer in laissez-faire and the cold reality is that it is peoples self-interest that will see us though.
Some business people may think Brexit is a terrible idea but they're going to work to ensure their own business copes fine despite Brexit. Other business people May think Brexit is a great idea and they're going to work to ensure their own business gets the benefits of Brexit. Others may not think Brexit affects them and will work to ensure their own business works because that's what they do every day anyway.
Ultimately whether people are A B or C is irrelevant. What matters is that people look after themselves. Brexit is a sideshow really.
People get on and manage, but if their lives get abruptly more difficult, they don't forget who is to blame. The attempts so far by the government to pin the blame on the EU seem to have been singularly unsuccessful, so that doesn't bode well for them.
So after all this nonsense the government policy still appears to be May’s deal. They have learned nothing. By the end of the week we’ll be talking about MV5.
May's deal is unlikely but still not impossible. It would have got through last week without DUP if all the Tories had voted for it. If it became clear that the alternatives to it are either Clarke's CU (Corn Laws moment for the Conservatives) or No deal by operation of law (Commons cannot on their own stop it) it might be the only choice.
However this is resolved once the can kicking stops it will be something that is at present unlikely, simply because of the number of permutations.
PS DUP won't vote for anything, or say what they would vote for, because they want to remain but want someone else to do the remaining. At the moment they both have and eat their cake and they don't want it to end.
When are Mercedes going to force Merkel to give us a good deal?
They all know we hold all the cards don’t they ?
It needs repeating, and so I do, that there are no upsides to Brexit. If there were any we would know about them by now. Leavers have had three years to identify them. Therefore Brexit is entirely about managing the many downsides and to select from the various poor alternatives. I realise this is a difficult conversation for Leavers, who voted to make things better, as they saw it. The current crisis stems from this contradiction and was inevitable.
There are upsides but as has oft been said ... we haven't left yet.
There hasn't really been much on the upsides of remaining - everything has been on how bad it will be to leave.
The obverse of the downsides of leaving is the upsides of remaining: frictionless trade and greater prosperity and opportunities; having a say in and influence over the rules we need to follow.
The downsides of leaving essentially are less trade and therefore less prosperity, jobs, public welfare etc; having to follow rules that we no say over; those rules increasingly being made against our interest because we don't attend the meetings where the decisions are made.
Those rules are increasingly being made at a level above the EU where, because of our membership of the EU, we have no voice and no seat. Leaving the EU increases, rather than decreases, our ability to shape rules and regulations.
Inside the EU we have no veto on the policy being advanced on our behalf in these organisations. The voice that speaks and the hand that votes is the EU, not us.
Outside the EU we have our own seat, our own voice and our own vote including the right to veto.
How much say did Switzerland have in GDPR legislation?
@rcs1000 hits the nail on the head. May’s deal is a temporary Customs Union.
Anyone who votes for a permanent CU versus a temporary CU is either mischief-making (Labour), or thick (Tories).
If we *do* end up with a CU, we will be looking to relitigate it about 5 minutes later. It is not a viable outcome.
Without a customs union, we have no viable way of leaving the European Union. Saying Japan etc doesn't have a CU misses the point. It doesn't have a controversial land border with the continental consortium. It doesn't have the same commitment to frictionless trade with its neighbours.
Leavers should be DESPERATE for a customs union with the EU. It's the only thing that makes Brexit sort of work.
PS I am VERY confident we will end up in a deep customs union of some kind with the EU (possibly full membership), but there could be a spell of No Deal chaos first.
ISTR that you were very confident that May would pivot to SM in her summer 2017 speech (Florence?)
Because abiding by the referendum result was not just a Tory pledge but a Labour one too. So there are absolutely no excuses for MPs not enacting it.
And manifesto pledges should be legally binding - all of them. If you can't deliver it then don't promise it in the first place.
Traditionally the opposition manifesto resets when they lose the election, on the grounds that the voters took a look at what they were offering and told them to rethink it.
The vast majority of MPs who took their seats in Parliament stood on both party and personal manifestos that they would abide by the result of the referendum.
As an aside, those of you who want PR which would lead to almost permanent minority governments or coalitions should look at what is happening now in Parliament and realise this is the future if you get your way.
We'd learn how to talk to each other, I guess. And it might at least prevent us pursuing follies like Brexit in the future.
As an aside, 'manifesto pledges should be legally binding' is an aspiration entirely suitable for the 1st April.
When are Mercedes going to force Merkel to give us a good deal?
They all know we hold all the cards don’t they ?
It needs repeating, and so I do, that there are no upsides to Brexit. If there were any we would know about them by now. Leavers have had three years to identify them. Therefore Brexit is entirely about managing the many downsides and to select from the various poor alternatives. I realise this is a difficult conversation for Leavers, who voted to make things better, as they saw it. The current crisis stems from this contradiction and was inevitable.
There’s one upside.
No Deal Brexit destroys the British Eurosceptic movement.
Within two years no one will admit to voting Leave except the mentally incapable and Russian trolls.
Unless of course it is a success. Which it likely will be as the bloody minded British public just muddle through.
I suspect everyone will get behind Brexit in the national interest in exactly the same way as Farage and co did their bed to make a success of our membership of the EU.
Nobody has to "get behind Brexit" since Brexit is a concept/event not a physical activity people need to work on. I'm a great believer in laissez-faire and the cold reality is that it is peoples self-interest that will see us though.
Some business people may think Brexit is a terrible idea but they're going to work to ensure their own business copes fine despite Brexit. Other business people May think Brexit is a great idea and they're going to work to ensure their own business gets the benefits of Brexit. Others may not think Brexit affects them and will work to ensure their own business works because that's what they do every day anyway.
Ultimately whether people are A B or C is irrelevant. What matters is that people look after themselves. Brexit is a sideshow really.
People get on and manage, but if their lives get abruptly more difficult, they don't forget who is to blame. The attempts so far by the government to pin the blame on the EU seem to have been singularly unsuccessful, so that doesn't bode well for them.
Good!
The government shouldn't be trying to pass the buck. It should be trying to spot any problems it can fix and fix them.
When are Mercedes going to force Merkel to give us a good deal?
They all know we hold all the cards don’t they ?
It needs repeating, and so I do, that there are no upsides to Brexit. If there were any we would know about them by now. Leavers have had three years to identify them. Therefore Brexit is entirely about managing the many downsides and to select from the various poor alternatives. I realise this is a difficult conversation for Leavers, who voted to make things better, as they saw it. The current crisis stems from this contradiction and was inevitable.
There are upsides but as has oft been said ... we haven't left yet.
There hasn't really been much on the upsides of remaining - everything has been on how bad it will be to leave.
The obverse of the downsides of leaving is the upsides of remaining: frictionless trade and greater prosperity and opportunities; having a say in and influence over the rules we need to follow.
The downsides of leaving essentially are less trade and therefore less prosperity, jobs, public welfare etc; having to follow rules that we no say over; those rules increasingly being made against our interest because we don't attend the meetings where the decisions are made.
Those rules are increasingly being made at a level above the EU where, because of our membership of the EU, we have no voice and no seat. Leaving the EU increases, rather than decreases, our ability to shape rules and regulations.
Inside the EU we have no veto on the policy being advanced on our behalf in these organisations. The voice that speaks and the hand that votes is the EU, not us.
Outside the EU we have our own seat, our own voice and our own vote including the right to veto.
How much say did Switzerland have in GDPR legislation?
When are Mercedes going to force Merkel to give us a good deal?
They all know we hold all the cards don’t they ?
It needs repeating, and so I do, that there are no upsides to Brexit. If there were any we would know about them by now. Leavers have had three years to identify them. Therefore Brexit is entirely about managing the many downsides and to select from the various poor alternatives. I realise this is a difficult conversation for Leavers, who voted to make things better, as they saw it. The current crisis stems from this contradiction and was inevitable.
There’s one upside.
No Deal Brexit destroys the British Eurosceptic movement.
Within two years no one will admit to voting Leave except the mentally incapable and Russian trolls.
Unless of course it is a success. Which it likely will be as the bloody minded British public just muddle through.
I suspect everyone will get behind Brexit in the national interest in exactly the same way as Farage and co did their bed to make a success of our membership of the EU.
Nobody has to "get behind Brexit" since Brexit is a concept/event not a physical activity people need to work on. I'm a great believer in laissez-faire and the cold reality is that it is peoples self-interest that will see us though.
Some business people may think Brexit is a terrible idea but they're going to work to ensure their own business copes fine despite Brexit. Other business people May think Brexit is a great idea and they're going to work to ensure their own business gets the benefits of Brexit. Others may not think Brexit affects them and will work to ensure their own business works because that's what they do every day anyway.
Ultimately whether people are A B or C is irrelevant. What matters is that people look after themselves. Brexit is a sideshow really.
People get on and manage, but if their lives get abruptly more difficult, they don't forget who is to blame. The attempts so far by the government to pin the blame on the EU seem to have been singularly unsuccessful, so that doesn't bode well for them.
Good!
The government shouldn't be trying to pass the buck. It should be trying to spot any problems it can fix and fix them.
Well as long as you're happy for the right people to get the blame, that's all AOK with me too ;.)
I saw the discussion on whether or not the Tories should be aiming to abide by their manifesto commitments from 2017 last night, so I went to have a look at how they're doing.
Key policies - Real terms increases in NHS spending reaching £8bn extra per year by 2022/23 [not on track] - Scrapping the triple-lock on the state pension after 2020, replacing it with a "double lock", rising with earnings or inflation [abandoned immediately] - Means test winter fuel payments, taking away £300 from wealthier pensioners [abandoned immediately] - Raising cost of care threshold from £23,000 to £100,000 - but include value of home in calculation of assets for home care as well as residential care [abandoned immediately] - Scrap free school lunches for infants in England, but offer free breakfasts across the primary years [abandoned] - Pump an extra £4bn into schools by 2022 [not on track] - Net migration cut to below 100,000 [not on track] - Increase the amount levied on firms employing non-EU migrant workers [not sure on this one]
Strangely, not one of these seems to have been raised by those so incensed by the idea that the Tories could fail to enact one of their manifesto commitments.
It's almost as if they're less concerned on the point of principle of enforcing manifesto commitments than on getting something they personally wanted.
Because abiding by the referendum result was not just a Tory pledge but a Labour one too. So there are absolutely no excuses for MPs not enacting it.
And manifesto pledges should be legally binding - all of them. If you can't deliver it then don't promise it in the first place.
Yes absolutely. If there is an overall parliamentary majority. If not then it is a best efforts, everything has changed situation. How can you make it legally binding to implement a policy if the party you end up in bed with, however formally, objects to it?
Oh I agree with you on that. Again it highlights how bad coalitions (and hence PR) are for our democratic process. But in this instance I was talking more in terms of the personal manifestos and promises made by all those MPs now trying to prevent Brexit and the fact that both parties made the same pledge to honour the referendum result.
So let's assume half a dozen cabinet ministers resign as May is forced to embraced the CU. Why does that mean the end for May? Surely only a Con VoNC in her (not before December) or a HoC VoNC on the government can force her out.
When are Mercedes going to force Merkel to give us a good deal?
They all know we hold all the cards don’t they ?
It needs repeating, and so I do, that there are no upsides to Brexit. If there were any we would know about them by now. Leavers have had three years to identify them. Therefore Brexit is entirely about managing the many downsides and to select from the various poor alternatives. I realise this is a difficult conversation for Leavers, who voted to make things better, as they saw it. The current crisis stems from this contradiction and was inevitable.
There are upsides but as has oft been said ... we haven't left yet.
There hasn't really been much on the upsides of remaining - everything has been on how bad it will be to leave.
The obverse of the downsides of leaving is the upsides of remaining: frictionless trade and greater prosperity and opportunities; having a say in and influence over the rules we need to follow.
The downsides of leaving essentially are less trade and therefore less prosperity, jobs, public welfare etc; having to follow rules that we no say over; those rules increasingly being made against our interest because we don't attend the meetings where the decisions are made.
Those rules are increasingly being made at a level above the EU where, because of our membership of the EU, we have no voice and no seat. Leaving the EU increases, rather than decreases, our ability to shape rules and regulations.
Inside the EU we have no veto on the policy being advanced on our behalf in these organisations. The voice that speaks and the hand that votes is the EU, not us.
Outside the EU we have our own seat, our own voice and our own vote including the right to veto.
How much say did Switzerland have in GDPR legislation?
I don't recall GDPR coming from 'above EU level'.
Precisely. Richard's argument is deluded.
Nope because my argument was exactly about membership of those institutions above EU level which now dictate so many of our regulations. It is you who are deluded about this because of your Euro-fanaticism.
Comments
The day the 1st April caught up with the political class with no external inteference needed.
In other words, Trump-esque
Leavers should be DESPERATE for a customs union with the EU. It's the only thing that makes Brexit sort of work.
FWIW, my opinion is that she could survive losing either one of Mordaunt or Grayling, but not both. If the two of them walk together, no doubt backed up with a powerful joint letter to the Daily Express, that spells the end of soft Brexit as a realistic possibility, and quite possibly the end of this government.
In what is apparently not an April Fools (it emerged over the weekend), Elon Musk has released a rap song:
https://gizmodo.com/we-regret-to-inform-you-elon-musk-has-released-a-rap-si-1833705207
When are Mercedes going to force Merkel to give us a good deal?
They all know we hold all the cards don’t they ?
Brexit with a Deal of whatever form still the Tories' best bet
If the Irish will not cooperate to avoid a border then a border becomes necessary. That is the alternative to the backstop.
Hmmmm.
Defeated 3 times, yes, but I would not write it off yet.
From the BBC News announcement of their key policies, we have:
Key policies
- Real terms increases in NHS spending reaching £8bn extra per year by 2022/23 [not on track]
- Scrapping the triple-lock on the state pension after 2020, replacing it with a "double lock", rising with earnings or inflation [abandoned immediately]
- Means test winter fuel payments, taking away £300 from wealthier pensioners [abandoned immediately]
- Raising cost of care threshold from £23,000 to £100,000 - but include value of home in calculation of assets for home care as well as residential care [abandoned immediately]
- Scrap free school lunches for infants in England, but offer free breakfasts across the primary years [abandoned]
- Pump an extra £4bn into schools by 2022 [not on track]
- Net migration cut to below 100,000 [not on track]
- Increase the amount levied on firms employing non-EU migrant workers [not sure on this one]
Strangely, not one of these seems to have been raised by those so incensed by the idea that the Tories could fail to enact one of their manifesto commitments.
It's almost as if they're less concerned on the point of principle of enforcing manifesto commitments than on getting something they personally wanted.
Revoke has 6,029,500 signatures
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584
No Deal has 600,300
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/229963
No Deal Brexit destroys the British Eurosceptic movement.
Within two years no one will admit to voting Leave except the mentally incapable and Russian trolls.
That strikes me as optimistic right now
Well it's 1/4. Which is a very appropriate date on which to plump for CU without SM. Which I really hope we don't.
If it's to be Soft Brexit let's for heaven's sake go for the one which has some coherence, CM2.0. Out of political EU, stay in commercial EU. Let's not ditch the dream just for expediency.
Soft Brexit means Soft Brexit.
There is a strange tendency of Brexiteers to fetishise the British public as some kind of stoic master race that will gladly put up with whatever voluntary adversity the government inflicts on them.
It's why revoking is the saner option (I don't mind Schengen but I don't want to be in a currency controlled by Germany).
Win win?
As a Remainer, I have never understood why people worried about this, and indeed, I suspect only a few europhobe people did before the vote was called.
The downsides massively outweigh that upside in my opinion, but I can see how some people might think it was more important than economics.
The trouble is Brexiteers told a pack of lies about other upsides, like wonderful trade deals, which don't exit. There are no economic upsides to Brexit. Indeed, I fear it will be economic Armageddon over next few years.
https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/Japan-unveils-dawn-of-the-Reiwa-era
And manifesto pledges should be legally binding - all of them. If you can't deliver it then don't promise it in the first place.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-northkorea-usa-document-exclusive/exclusive-with-a-piece-of-paper-trump-called-on-kim-to-hand-over-nuclear-weapons-idUSKCN1RA2NR
On the day that their talks in Hanoi collapsed last month, U.S. President Donald Trump handed North Korean leader Kim Jong Un a piece of paper that included a blunt call for the transfer of Pyongyang’s nuclear weapons and bomb fuel to the United States, according to the document seen by Reuters...
The downsides of leaving essentially are less trade and therefore less prosperity, jobs, public welfare etc; having to follow rules that we no say over; those rules increasingly being made against our interest because we don't attend the meetings where the decisions are made.
I wouldn't be surprised if Schengen membership happened *before* rejoining; If there are other member states that would rather Britain joined, they'll have more leverage in the post-no-deal negotiations than in the accession negotiations, which will probably take a long time and happen after everything has stabilized.
As the country steps up to its global destiny, I follow in a remarkable tradition. The first foreign secretary, Charles James Fox, abolished the slave trade. Another, George Canning, reshaped South America by helping its countries to achieve independence.
I said in that situation we wouldn’t be the only ones leaving, which would make leaving much easier.
They explicitly rule out No Deal.
Massive differences. No outcry - because if you do not get into Government in an election, your manifesto is void. It was rejected.
No-one other than the Tories and DUP have any compulsion or expectation to deliver any element of their earlier manifesto; they are free to come up with whatever they want for the next time round.
Manifesto pledges are not legally binding - that was clarified under UK law over a decade ago. Regardless of whether any particular individual thinks they should be so, they aren't, won't be, and never have been.
Point 2. "...manifesto pledges should be legally binding - all of them." What happens in a hung parliament? Should we jail politicians for not having a majority?
https://twitter.com/ale_mussolini_/status/1112246866480152576?s=21
Some business people may think Brexit is a terrible idea but they're going to work to ensure their own business copes fine despite Brexit.
Other business people May think Brexit is a great idea and they're going to work to ensure their own business gets the benefits of Brexit.
Others may not think Brexit affects them and will work to ensure their own business works because that's what they do every day anyway.
Ultimately whether people are A B or C is irrelevant. What matters is that people look after themselves. Brexit is a sideshow really.
Inside the EU we have no veto on the policy being advanced on our behalf in these organisations. The voice that speaks and the hand that votes is the EU, not us.
Outside the EU we have our own seat, our own voice and our own vote including the right to veto.
Meanwhile you're indicating you want us to leave (but not for a decade), yet at the same time gleeful at the prospect of the sceptical movement, as you term it, being destroyed.
As an aside, those of you who want PR which would lead to almost permanent minority governments or coalitions should look at what is happening now in Parliament and realise this is the future if you get your way.
And that's who you want voting to set our laws?
No thanks. That Tweet sums up why we should Brexit.
However this is resolved once the can kicking stops it will be something that is at present unlikely, simply because of the number of permutations.
PS DUP won't vote for anything, or say what they would vote for, because they want to remain but want someone else to do the remaining. At the moment they both have and eat their cake and they don't want it to end.
And it might at least prevent us pursuing follies like Brexit in the future.
As an aside, 'manifesto pledges should be legally binding' is an aspiration entirely suitable for the 1st April.
The government shouldn't be trying to pass the buck. It should be trying to spot any problems it can fix and fix them.
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584
https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/1112615864195518467
I think what was being demanded was essentially what Gaddafi was persuaded to accept. Not so easy the second time around.