"Nick Clegg says Facebook is NOT responsible for things posted on the site and is being asked to self-regulate in a way 'no private company should be expected to do'"
I do not know if the ES is quoting Cox accurof VoNC the Government.
Based on the AG's advice the Government has not used the royal prerogative to conduct the negotiations and in any case I cannot see the Queen allowing her prerogative to be used to try and override the will of Parliament and her advisers would make that clear to May
You do not know any of that. All you have is anonymous briefings via a paper which is known for its opposition to Brexit and which is saying things you want to be true.
You have not seen the AG's advice and nor have I. And like so many other occasions in the past when you have made definitive statements on this process which turned out to be rubbish you are in danger of making a fool of yourself once again.
Nor do you apparently understand Royal Prerogative. It has nothing to do with the Queen allowing anything. It is a constitutional arrangement whereby certain functions of Government are reserved for the Executive.
Definitive statemants such as what?
I fail to see what is surprising about Cox's statement, Parliament is sovereign under our constitution and he is simply reflecting that which has been the case since the Civil War and Glorious Revolution.
If anyone does not understand the royal prerogative it is you, in any case the royal prerogative is entirely within the interpretation of the Courts. May only holds office as Head of Her Majesty's government because she supposedly commands the confidence of Parliament to be the Queen's Minister, if she wanted the Queen could dismiss May tomorrow and choose another MP to be PM more likely to command support in the Commons if May tries to defy the will of Parliament. The Head of State in the UK is the Queen, not Theresa May, the royal prerogative and the Executive is thus the Crown with the Cabinet simply acting on behalf of the Crown.
The monarch remains constitutionally empowered to exercise the royal prerogative against the advice of the prime minister or the cabinet if, for example, the monarch felt to exercise it would be to try and explicitly override the will of Parliament. Article 1 of the Bill of Rights also states the "power of suspending the laws or the execution of laws by regal authority without consent of Parliament is illegal"
If fewer than, say, 35 Lab MPs vote against the options of CU or Common Market 2, will they both to bring the WA back for MV3? With the hardliners revealed and a few like Drax reverting, unless in a straight shootout between two final options Lab MPs have no choice but to back the deal what's the point?
I really hope Common Market 2.0 is agreed. It's clearly the best compromise that honours the referendum result but also conserves the economy. I'd prefer remain but I can live with it. It's really where Britain should have been all along.
I don't see how it can be said to honour the referendum result when it doesn't deliver on the key things the Leave campaign were presenting to people.
Leave presented a moon on the stick. And many people voted leave but actually don't mind Freedom of Labour - I'm one, I'm sure Richard Tyndall is another....
Indeed. There are rather a lot of us on here. Robert S is another who immediately springs to mind.
Indeed. Lots of mad things were said during the referendum campaign. A Norway style Brexit (as promoted by Richard since Day One) respects the result of the referendum, offers economic security and will almost certainly lead to a ‘relief bounce’ in the economy.
I am with @RoyalBlue - time to lay down the swords and compromise.
Are we allowed to use the word vassalage without being accused of promoting violence?
To put it more technically, we would move to keeping the EU rules, simply giving up political influence over them. That is what you are suggesting?
At some point 99% of the population will say, this is silly, if we are having those rules we might as well have the political influence over them. And we’ll be back to square one?
That is certainly not what the Norway option means at all.
Stats don’t reveal truth when there are two different populations, climates, cultures, economies. Norway certainly has a bit of oil revenue to sweeten public spending and hence their populace’s perceptions. Yet each Norwegian household still pay almost as much into the EU as UK does now? That’s a funny definition of out?
No it doesn't. Some of us on here looked in detail at this around the time of the referendum and the UK equivalent commitment if we had a Norway Deal would be something around £3bn a year. It is massively less than now.
You are also wrong on the influence that Norway has over policy making as part of the EEA agreement.
Ironically the weakness of Norway - an inability to control immigration - has been partly answered by making the UK, well, a less favourable place to come.
"Nick Clegg says Facebook is NOT responsible for things posted on the site and is being asked to self-regulate in a way 'no private company should be expected to do'"
I bet he wouldn't be saying that if he was still an mp.
He may well be fighting a losing battle. Congress may (eventually) decide otherwise. Certainly can see the EU doing so.
Still by then he will have millions in the bank and a great suntan (something that is definitely not available in Sheffield).
I actually have no idea what the solution is or how I feel about it. There is something very wrong, but politicians and technology is always a disaster. Article 11 and 13 being a classic example.
It would be easier if those not running announced....
I'm not running in 2020.
I may run in 2024.
If a foreign born Muslim can become POTUS in 2008 and 2012 why not in 2024?
Lol...I think your internet posts might be a bit problematic....remember the trouble mitt Romney got in with his 47% quote. Not sure you disdain for peasant wagons will go down too well.
My disdain for peasant wagons is purely down to
1) They don't have seat belts, which is something I've always been told to wear in moving vehicles.
2) I'd use peasant wagons if they had a first class section to keep me away from the riff raff.
Layla Moran ✔ @LaylaMoran Many grim faces tonight. I’ve decided to vote FOR PV and Revoke and not obstruct the softer options (abstain). I can’t in good conscience vote for any kind of Brexit but neither do I want a No Deal so that’s the compromise position I’ve taken.
"Nick Clegg says Facebook is NOT responsible for things posted on the site and is being asked to self-regulate in a way 'no private company should be expected to do'"
I'd also remind everyone prior to his advice on the revised Withdrawal Agreement several media organisations said Geoffrey Cox's legal advice to the PM would be very favourable to her.
It was not.
Yes, Cox advises as a lawyer on the law regardless of the politics
No point arguing. If its a matter of the law and obeying it, then it can be answered and cleared up.
Which MP can we pay to ask the question?
I expect Cox will make the legal position clear himself in a statement to the House in the next few years
Highest level of stockpiling by UK companies in history by any G7 economy .
Utterly pathetic and tragic that it’s come to this .
Agreed. Our political class have failed us utterly.
On the positive side it did boost production. In the EZ they had the lowest manufacturing PMI since April 2013 and there is a yield inversion in the US which may well be indicative of a recession in the next year or so. Our politics is truly crap but in economic terms we remain a haven of relative stability.
Even without stock building, the manufacturing PMI would have been positive.
Indeed. As I say for all the cries of disaster and the end of the world as we know it the UK continues to perform well and our relative performance is getting better. Maybe politicians just aren't as important as they like to think.
Highest level of stockpiling by UK companies in history by any G7 economy .
Utterly pathetic and tragic that it’s come to this .
Agreed. Our political class have failed us utterly.
On the positive side it did boost production. In the EZ they had the lowest manufacturing PMI since April 2013 and there is a yield inversion in the US which may well be indicative of a recession in the next year or so. Our politics is truly crap but in economic terms we remain a haven of relative stability.
Even without stock building, the manufacturing PMI would have been positive.
Indeed. As I say for all the cries of disaster and the end of the world as we know it the UK continues to perform well and our relative performance is getting better. Maybe politicians just aren't as important as they like to think.
Well we used to get by without MPs for years at a time. Different era, admittedly.
Layla Moran ✔ @LaylaMoran Many grim faces tonight. I’ve decided to vote FOR PV and Revoke and not obstruct the softer options (abstain). I can’t in good conscience vote for any kind of Brexit but neither do I want a No Deal so that’s the compromise position I’ve taken.
That isn't a compromise position - that is a Remain position - which is just what she has advocated from the outset. She hasn't compromised in the slightest.
Layla Moran ✔ @LaylaMoran Many grim faces tonight. I’ve decided to vote FOR PV and Revoke and not obstruct the softer options (abstain). I can’t in good conscience vote for any kind of Brexit but neither do I want a No Deal so that’s the compromise position I’ve taken.
Layla Moran ✔ @LaylaMoran Many grim faces tonight. I’ve decided to vote FOR PV and Revoke and not obstruct the softer options (abstain). I can’t in good conscience vote for any kind of Brexit but neither do I want a No Deal so that’s the compromise position I’ve taken.
That isn't a compromise position - that is a Remain position - which is just what she has advocated from the outset. She hasn't compromised in the slightest.
It's progress in the sense she realised it might be important to look like she has compromised. But I agree, I don't see how what she has done is compromise.
Layla Moran ✔ @LaylaMoran Many grim faces tonight. I’ve decided to vote FOR PV and Revoke and not obstruct the softer options (abstain). I can’t in good conscience vote for any kind of Brexit but neither do I want a No Deal so that’s the compromise position I’ve taken.
That isn't a compromise position - that is a Remain position - which is just what she has advocated from the outset. She hasn't compromised in the slightest.
Most MPs are being disingenuous and have been for the past 2 years.
I don't see how it can be said to honour the referendum result when it doesn't deliver on the key things the Leave campaign were presenting to people.
And many people voted leave but actually don't mind Freedom of Labour - I'm one, I'm sure Richard Tyndall is another....
Indeed. There are rather a lot of us on here. Robert S is another who immediately springs to mind.
Indeed. Lots of mad things were said during the referendum campaign. A Norway style Brexit (as promoted by Richard since Day One) respects the result of the referendum
Are we allowed to use the word vassalage without being accused of promoting violence?
To put it more technically, we would move to keeping the EU rules, simply giving up political influence over them. That is what you are suggesting?
At some point 99% of the population will say, this is silly, if we are having those rules we might as well have the political influence over them. And we’ll be back to square one?
That is certainly not what the Norway option means at all.
Stats don’t reveal truth when there are two different populations, climates, cultures, economies. Norway certainly has a bit of oil revenue to sweeten public spending and hence their populace’s perceptions. Yet each Norwegian household still pay almost as much into the EU as UK does now? That’s a funny definition of out?
No it doesn't. Some of us on here looked in detail at this around the time of the referendum and the UK equivalent commitment if we had a Norway Deal would be something around £3bn a year. It is massively less than now.
You are also wrong on the influence that Norway has over policy making as part of the EEA agreement.
Not quite sure that is a good example for brexit, as it’s not entirely honest to say they are out of it in the way a true brexit will allow us to say it
Layla Moran ✔ @LaylaMoran Many grim faces tonight. I’ve decided to vote FOR PV and Revoke and not obstruct the softer options (abstain). I can’t in good conscience vote for any kind of Brexit but neither do I want a No Deal so that’s the compromise position I’ve taken.
That isn't a compromise position - that is a Remain position - which is just what she has advocated from the outset. She hasn't compromised in the slightest.
Yeah but she said it on Twitter so it must be true.
Layla Moran ✔ @LaylaMoran Many grim faces tonight. I’ve decided to vote FOR PV and Revoke and not obstruct the softer options (abstain). I can’t in good conscience vote for any kind of Brexit but neither do I want a No Deal so that’s the compromise position I’ve taken.
Revoking is a compromise position?
I think she means abstaining on the other stuff instead of voting against.
Highest level of stockpiling by UK companies in history by any G7 economy .
Utterly pathetic and tragic that it’s come to this .
Agreed. Our political class have failed us utterly.
On the positive side it did boost production. In the EZ they had the lowest manufacturing PMI since April 2013 and there is a yield inversion in the US which may well be indicative of a recession in the next year or so. Our politics is truly crap but in economic terms we remain a haven of relative stability.
Even without stock building, the manufacturing PMI would have been positive.
Indeed. As I say for all the cries of disaster and the end of the world as we know it the UK continues to perform well and our relative performance is getting better. Maybe politicians just aren't as important as they like to think.
Well we used to get by without MPs for years at a time. Different era, admittedly.
I think we have been doing that since 2016. The MPs aren't involved, they simply chat amongst themselves pointlessly and endlessly.
Why are they voting on this Common Market 2.0 thingy? My understanding is that it involves re-joining EFTA. Parliament can't do this unilaterally, it's not within the gift of the EU either, and the actual EFTA members do not appear to want us back. Therefore, is the entire proposition not merely yet another unicorn concept?
MPs might just as well debate the colonisation of Mars as a solution to Brexit, for all the good it will do.
Layla Moran ✔ @LaylaMoran Many grim faces tonight. I’ve decided to vote FOR PV and Revoke and not obstruct the softer options (abstain). I can’t in good conscience vote for any kind of Brexit but neither do I want a No Deal so that’s the compromise position I’ve taken.
Revoking is a compromise position?
I think abstaining is the compromise. Mind you earlier this morning:
Layla Moran ✔ @LaylaMoran Many grim faces tonight. I’ve decided to vote FOR PV and Revoke and not obstruct the softer options (abstain). I can’t in good conscience vote for any kind of Brexit but neither do I want a No Deal so that’s the compromise position I’ve taken.
That isn't a compromise position - that is a Remain position - which is just what she has advocated from the outset. She hasn't compromised in the slightest.
It's progress in the sense she realised it might be important to look like she has compromised. But I agree, I don't see how what she has done is compromise.
I think that in her terms it's a compromise to have abstained on the brexit votes rather then voted against them.
I'd also remind everyone prior to his advice on the revised Withdrawal Agreement several media organisations said Geoffrey Cox's legal advice to the PM would be very favourable to her.
It was not.
Yes, Cox advises as a lawyer on the law regardless of the politics
No point arguing. If its a matter of the law and obeying it, then it can be answered and cleared up.
Which MP can we pay to ask the question?
I expect Cox will make the legal position clear himself in a statement to the House in the next few years
Are you having a bubble? Was that meant to be funny?
Layla Moran ✔ @LaylaMoran Many grim faces tonight. I’ve decided to vote FOR PV and Revoke and not obstruct the softer options (abstain). I can’t in good conscience vote for any kind of Brexit but neither do I want a No Deal so that’s the compromise position I’ve taken.
That isn't a compromise position - that is a Remain position - which is just what she has advocated from the outset. She hasn't compromised in the slightest.
It's progress in the sense she realised it might be important to look like she has compromised. But I agree, I don't see how what she has done is compromise.
I think that in her terms it's a compromise to have abstained on the brexit votes rather then voted against them.
Why are they voting on this Common Market 2.0 thingy? My understanding is that it involves re-joining EFTA. Parliament can't do this unilaterally, it's not within the gift of the EU either, and the actual EFTA members do not appear to want us back. Therefore, is the entire proposition not merely yet another unicorn concept?
MPs might just as well debate the colonisation of Mars as a solution to Brexit, for all the good it will do.
"We shall turn the Red Planet blue! Tories for martian colonization!"
Layla Moran ✔ @LaylaMoran Many grim faces tonight. I’ve decided to vote FOR PV and Revoke and not obstruct the softer options (abstain). I can’t in good conscience vote for any kind of Brexit but neither do I want a No Deal so that’s the compromise position I’ve taken.
That isn't a compromise position - that is a Remain position - which is just what she has advocated from the outset. She hasn't compromised in the slightest.
It's progress in the sense she realised it might be important to look like she has compromised. But I agree, I don't see how what she has done is compromise.
I think that in her terms it's a compromise to have abstained on the brexit votes rather then voted against them.
Yes, in her terms. I don't see that it is actually a compromise though.
Layla Moran ✔ @LaylaMoran Many grim faces tonight. I’ve decided to vote FOR PV and Revoke and not obstruct the softer options (abstain). I can’t in good conscience vote for any kind of Brexit but neither do I want a No Deal so that’s the compromise position I’ve taken.
Revoking is a compromise position?
It's a compromise compared to her preferred option of travelling back in time to make sure that the referendum never happens in the first place. She will leave you with your memories of having voted leave. Be grateful!
Layla Moran ✔ @LaylaMoran Many grim faces tonight. I’ve decided to vote FOR PV and Revoke and not obstruct the softer options (abstain). I can’t in good conscience vote for any kind of Brexit but neither do I want a No Deal so that’s the compromise position I’ve taken.
How gracious of her to "compromise" by going for a losers vote or failing that outright revocation.
I'd also remind everyone prior to his advice on the revised Withdrawal Agreement several media organisations said Geoffrey Cox's legal advice to the PM would be very favourable to her.
It was not.
Yes, Cox advises as a lawyer on the law regardless of the politics
No point arguing. If its a matter of the law and obeying it, then it can be answered and cleared up.
Which MP can we pay to ask the question?
I expect Cox will make the legal position clear himself in a statement to the House in the next few years
Are you having a bubble? Was that meant to be funny?
Why are they voting on this Common Market 2.0 thingy? My understanding is that it involves re-joining EFTA. Parliament can't do this unilaterally, it's not within the gift of the EU either, and the actual EFTA members do not appear to want us back. Therefore, is the entire proposition not merely yet another unicorn concept?
MPs might just as well debate the colonisation of Mars as a solution to Brexit, for all the good it will do.
In Boles' own words 'Some have claimed that Norway is opposed to British membership of EEA/Efta. This is not true. A recent headline in Norway’s Nationen newspaper read “Solberg sier britene er velhomne i EFTA.” In the piece, Erna Solberg, the Norwegian Prime Minister, confirmed “if that is what they [UK] really want then we will find a solution in the future.” We would need to negotiate a derogation to the Efta Convention so we could be part of a customs arrangement with the EU. But this is something that could be negotiated by December 2020 as part of our Efta accession. Others have claimed that the EU would not want the UK to join Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein in the Efta pillar of the EEA. This is also not true. Michel Barnier has repeatedly offered Norway Plus as the only Brexit deal that guarantees ‘frictionless trade’. It may be that some people in the European Commission, and some politicians in Norway and elsewhere, would prefer to create a new EEA pillar for the UK. But what matters is what the leader of Norway’s government and the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator think, and they are clear: the UK would be welcome to join Norway in the EEA and Efta' https://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2018/12/nick-boles-demolishing-five-myths-about-norway-plus.html
Layla Moran ✔ @LaylaMoran Many grim faces tonight. I’ve decided to vote FOR PV and Revoke and not obstruct the softer options (abstain). I can’t in good conscience vote for any kind of Brexit but neither do I want a No Deal so that’s the compromise position I’ve taken.
Revoking is a compromise position?
I think abstaining is the compromise. Mind you earlier this morning:
Customs Unions are complex. It isn't a case of customs unions good or customs unions bad.
The UK and the EU have a lot of options in how they draft their customs union and we shouldn't expect it to look like the Turkish one.
The UK could probably get the EU to insist on its inclusion in every trade agreement the EU makes. The UK has sufficient economic weight to make that attractive to both the EU and the third county. The customs union would have to include agriculture in that case (also needed for the Irish border). The UK would have to accept having the deals is more important than having an independent trade policy.
The UK would need to follow EU rules.
All the experts think a customs union should be considered and that a workable customs union is possible.
Highest level of stockpiling by UK companies in history by any G7 economy .
Utterly pathetic and tragic that it’s come to this .
Agreed. Our political class have failed us utterly.
On the positive side it did boost production. In the EZ they had the lowest manufacturing PMI since April 2013 and there is a yield inversion in the US which may well be indicative of a recession in the next year or so. Our politics is truly crap but in economic terms we remain a haven of relative stability.
Even without stock building, the manufacturing PMI would have been positive.
Indeed. As I say for all the cries of disaster and the end of the world as we know it the UK continues to perform well and our relative performance is getting better. Maybe politicians just aren't as important as they like to think.
Robert Smithson often points out that Italy boomed for 40 years when it did not have a functioning government.
Layla Moran ✔ @LaylaMoran Many grim faces tonight. I’ve decided to vote FOR PV and Revoke and not obstruct the softer options (abstain). I can’t in good conscience vote for any kind of Brexit but neither do I want a No Deal so that’s the compromise position I’ve taken.
Revoking is a compromise position?
I think abstaining is the compromise. Mind you earlier this morning:
Layla Moran ✔ @LaylaMoran Many grim faces tonight. I’ve decided to vote FOR PV and Revoke and not obstruct the softer options (abstain). I can’t in good conscience vote for any kind of Brexit but neither do I want a No Deal so that’s the compromise position I’ve taken.
How gracious of her to "compromise" by going for a losers vote or failing that outright revocation.
Must have been such a wrench for her...
She has voted same as last week why bother tweeting
I really hope Common Market 2.0 is agreed. It's clearly the best compromise that honours the referendum result but also conserves the economy. I'd prefer remain but I can live with it. It's really where Britain should have been all along.
I don't see how it can be said to honour the referendum result when it doesn't deliver on the key things the Leave campaign were presenting to people.
Leave presented a moon on the stick. And many people voted leave but actually don't mind Freedom of Labour - I'm one, I'm sure Richard Tyndall is another....
Indeed. There are rather a lot of us on here. Robert S is another who immediately springs to mind.
Indeed. Lots of mad things were said during the referendum campaign. A Norway style Brexit (as promoted by Richard since Day One) respects the result of the referendum, offers economic security and will almost certainly lead to a ‘relief bounce’ in the economy.
I am with @RoyalBlue - time to lay down the swords and compromise.
Are we allowed to use the word vassalage without being accused of promoting violence?
To put it more technically, we would move to keeping the EU rules, simply giving up political influence over them. That is what you are suggesting?
At some point 99% of the population will say, this is silly, if we are having those rules we might as well have the political influence over them. And we’ll be back to square one?
That is certainly not what the Norway option means at all.
Stats don’t reveal truth when there are two different populations, climates, cultures, economies. Norway certainly has a bit of oil revenue to sweeten public spending and hence their populace’s perceptions. Yet each Norwegian household still pay almost as much into the EU as UK does now? That’s a funny definition of out?
Note - EEA payments are based on GDP and Norwegian GDP per capita is nearly double ours. Mental arithmetic implies taht our payments per capita under such a regime would be half our current ones.
Also - exempt from the majority of EU rules, and with a role in shaping the legislation that is applicable.
Layla Moran ✔ @LaylaMoran Many grim faces tonight. I’ve decided to vote FOR PV and Revoke and not obstruct the softer options (abstain). I can’t in good conscience vote for any kind of Brexit but neither do I want a No Deal so that’s the compromise position I’ve taken.
How gracious of her to "compromise" by going for a losers vote or failing that outright revocation.
Must have been such a wrench for her...
She has voted same as last week why bother tweeting
To show off and virtue signal like all our other waste of space MPs?
It would be easier if those not running announced....
I'm not running in 2020.
I may run in 2024.
If a foreign born Muslim can become POTUS in 2008 and 2012 why not in 2024?
Lol...I think your internet posts might be a bit problematic....remember the trouble mitt Romney got in with his 47% quote. Not sure you disdain for peasant wagons will go down too well.
My disdain for peasant wagons is purely down to
1) They don't have seat belts, which is something I've always been told to wear in moving vehicles.
2) I'd use peasant wagons if they had a first class section to keep me away from the riff raff.
Not quite sure that is a good example for brexit, as it’s not entirely honest to say they are out of it in the way a true brexit will allow us to say it
No it hasn't. That is simply wrong. The vast majority of EU law does not apply to EFTA members because it only pertains to the Single Market. The actual amount of EU legislation incorporated into Norwegian law is less than 30% according to the Norwegian Government.
And the Norwegians are involved in every stage of the development of new EEA legislation up to the final vote. The idea that they are just blindly taking laws from the EU is bullshit.
On the question of money, Norway pays around 300 million Euros a year to the EU for Single Market and programme access. The amount paid is based on GDP and with our larger GDP that amount would be around £3 billion.
Layla Moran ✔ @LaylaMoran Many grim faces tonight. I’ve decided to vote FOR PV and Revoke and not obstruct the softer options (abstain). I can’t in good conscience vote for any kind of Brexit but neither do I want a No Deal so that’s the compromise position I’ve taken.
How gracious of her to "compromise" by going for a losers vote or failing that outright revocation.
Must have been such a wrench for her...
She has voted same as last week why bother tweeting
To show off and virtue signal like all our other waste of space MPs?
Virtue signalling is all she has done since arriving in Westminster
It would be easier if those not running announced....
I'm not running in 2020.
I may run in 2024.
If a foreign born Muslim can become POTUS in 2008 and 2012 why not in 2024?
Lol...I think your internet posts might be a bit problematic....remember the trouble mitt Romney got in with his 47% quote. Not sure you disdain for peasant wagons will go down too well.
My disdain for peasant wagons is purely down to
1) They don't have seat belts, which is something I've always been told to wear in moving vehicles.
2) I'd use peasant wagons if they had a first class section to keep me away from the riff raff.
It would be easier if those not running announced....
I'm not running in 2020.
I may run in 2024.
If a foreign born Muslim can become POTUS in 2008 and 2012 why not in 2024?
Lol...I think your internet posts might be a bit problematic....remember the trouble mitt Romney got in with his 47% quote. Not sure you disdain for peasant wagons will go down too well.
My disdain for peasant wagons is purely down to
1) They don't have seat belts, which is something I've always been told to wear in moving vehicles.
2) I'd use peasant wagons if they had a first class section to keep me away from the riff raff.
What are "peasant wagons?"
Those big vehicles that Jezza is always banging on about at PMQs.
I really hope Common Market 2.0 is agreed. It's clearly the best compromise that honours the referendum result but also conserves the economy. I'd prefer remain but I can live with it. It's really where Britain should have been all along.
I don't see how it can be said to honour the referendum result when it doesn't deliver on the key things the Leave campaign were presenting to people.
Leave presented a moon on the stick. And many people voted leave but actually don't mind Freedom of Labour - I'm one, I'm sure Richard Tyndall is another....
Indeed. There are rather a lot of us on here. Robert S is another who immediately springs to mind.
Indeed. Lots of mad things were said during the referendum campaign. A Norway style Brexit (as promoted by Richard since Day One) respects the result of the referendum, offers economic security and will almost certainly lead to a ‘relief bounce’ in the economy.
I am with @RoyalBlue - time to lay down the swords and compromise.
Are we allowed to use the word vassalage without being accused of promoting violence?
To put it more technically, we would move to keeping the EU rules, simply giving up political influence over them. That is what you are suggesting?
At some point 99% of the population will say, this is silly, if we are having those rules we might as well have the political influence over them. And we’ll be back to square one?
That is certainly not what the Norway option means at all.
Stats don’t reveal truth when there are two different populations, climates, cultures, economies. Norway certainly has a bit of oil revenue to sweeten public spending and hence their populace’s perceptions. Yet each Norwegian household still pay almost as much into the EU as UK does now? That’s a funny definition of out?
Note - EEA payments are based on GDP and Norwegian GDP per capita is nearly double ours. Mental arithmetic implies taht our payments per capita under such a regime would be half our current ones.
Also - exempt from the majority of EU rules, and with a role in shaping the legislation that is applicable.
And those Norwegian payments you are mentioning include the Norway fund which is not necessary for single market access.
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 143 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 42 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 1 Green MP, 14 Independents
We can now add in the SNP (35) and see what happens if you assume Labour split like they did on their own bill, now they are whipped in favour (226/12)
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 226 Labour MPs, 35 SNP, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents (306) Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 12 Labour, 1 LD, 1 Green, 14 Ind (253)
Which passes comfortably. So you could play around with lab (and a handful of inds) a bit and still get a pass.
If it comes to a final choice between Common Market 2.0 /Customs Union or May's deal, how would the likes of Clarke and Boles be likely to vote given that hitherto both have supported May on the MV votes?
The choice could not be framed in that way. The HoC votes for or against a proposal, to make a forced choice between two proposals would require a procedural motion to be passed to put such a choice before the House and such a procedural motion is unlikely to be carried.
I do understand that, but there have been suggestions in recent days that May will seek to pit her Deal against the preferred option that emerges from Letwin's process.
It would be easier if those not running announced....
I'm not running in 2020.
I may run in 2024.
If a foreign born Muslim can become POTUS in 2008 and 2012 why not in 2024?
Lol...I think your internet posts might be a bit problematic....remember the trouble mitt Romney got in with his 47% quote. Not sure you disdain for peasant wagons will go down too well.
My disdain for peasant wagons is purely down to
1) They don't have seat belts, which is something I've always been told to wear in moving vehicles.
2) I'd use peasant wagons if they had a first class section to keep me away from the riff raff.
What are "peasant wagons?"
Buses.
Driving through city centres would be easier without them.
Not quite sure that is a good example for brexit, as it’s not entirely honest to say they are out of it in the way a true brexit will allow us to say it
No it hasn't. That is simply wrong. The vast majority of EU law does not apply to EFTA members because it only pertains to the Single Market. The actual amount of EU legislation incorporated into Norwegian law is less than 30% according to the Norwegian Government.
And the Norwegians are involved in every stage of the development of new EEA legislation up to the final vote. The idea that they are just blindly taking laws from the EU is bullshit.
On the question of money, Norway pays around 300 million Euros a year to the EU for Single Market and programme access. The amount paid is based on GDP and with our larger GDP that amount would be around £3 billion.
Customs Unions are complex. It isn't a case of customs unions good or customs unions bad.
The UK and the EU have a lot of options in how they draft their customs union and we shouldn't expect it to look like the Turkish one.
The UK could probably get the EU to insist on its inclusion in every trade agreement the EU makes. The UK has sufficient economic weight to make that attractive to both the EU and the third county. The customs union would have to include agriculture in that case (also needed for the Irish border). The UK would have to accept having the deals is more important than having an independent trade policy.
The UK would need to follow EU rules.
All the experts think a customs union should be considered and that a workable customs union is possible.
Again, that's all theory and it isn't tenable for the UK to be in a customs union (even if the EU agree to reciprocity on trade with non-EU partners) in the long term. The UK economy is simply too big not to have an independent trade and regulatory policy. It would be a good place to land for 5-7 years but beyond that we'd need to develop our own trade policy and independent regulatory standards, especially for the services sector where our markets are far more developed than the EU.
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 143 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 42 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 1 Green MP, 14 Independents
We can now add in the SNP (45) and see what happens if you assume Labour split like they did on their own bill, now they are whipped in favour (226/12)
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 226 Labour MPs, 45 SNP, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents (316) Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 12 Labour, 1 LD, 1 Green, 14 Ind (253)
Which passes comfortably. So you could play around with lab (and a handful of inds) a bit and still get a pass.
Ok, deal, and what was all the frigging fuss about?
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 143 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 42 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 1 Green MP, 14 Independents
We can now add in the SNP (45) and see what happens if you assume Labour split like they did on their own bill, now they are whipped in favour (226/12)
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 226 Labour MPs, 45 SNP, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents (316) Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 12 Labour, 1 LD, 1 Green, 14 Ind (253)
Which passes comfortably. So you could play around with lab (and a handful of inds) a bit and still get a pass.
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 143 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 42 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 1 Green MP, 14 Independents
We can now add in the SNP (45) and see what happens if you assume Labour split like they did on their own bill, now they are whipped in favour (226/12)
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 226 Labour MPs, 45 SNP, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents (316) Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 12 Labour, 1 LD, 1 Green, 14 Ind (253)
Which passes comfortably. So you could play around with lab (and a handful of inds) a bit and still get a pass.
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 143 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 42 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 1 Green MP, 14 Independents
We can now add in the SNP (45) and see what happens if you assume Labour split like they did on their own bill, now they are whipped in favour (226/12)
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 226 Labour MPs, 45 SNP, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents (316) Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 12 Labour, 1 LD, 1 Green, 14 Ind (253)
Which passes comfortably. So you could play around with lab (and a handful of inds) a bit and still get a pass.
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 143 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 42 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 1 Green MP, 14 Independents
We can now add in the SNP (45) and see what happens if you assume Labour split like they did on their own bill, now they are whipped in favour (226/12)
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 226 Labour MPs, 45 SNP, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents (316) Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 12 Labour, 1 LD, 1 Green, 14 Ind (253)
Which passes comfortably. So you could play around with lab (and a handful of inds) a bit and still get a pass.
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 143 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 42 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 1 Green MP, 14 Independents
We can now add in the SNP (45) and see what happens if you assume Labour split like they did on their own bill, now they are whipped in favour (226/12)
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 226 Labour MPs, 45 SNP, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents (316) Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 12 Labour, 1 LD, 1 Green, 14 Ind (253)
Which passes comfortably. So you could play around with lab (and a handful of inds) a bit and still get a pass.
35 SNP not 45
I don't know what you mean. You saw nothing...
You're right. These aren't the droids I'm looking for
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 143 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 42 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 1 Green MP, 14 Independents
We can now add in the SNP (45) and see what happens if you assume Labour split like they did on their own bill, now they are whipped in favour (226/12)
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 226 Labour MPs, 45 SNP, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents (316) Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 12 Labour, 1 LD, 1 Green, 14 Ind (253)
Which passes comfortably. So you could play around with lab (and a handful of inds) a bit and still get a pass.
It would be easier if those not running announced....
I'm not running in 2020.
I may run in 2024.
If a foreign born Muslim can become POTUS in 2008 and 2012 why not in 2024?
Lol...I think your internet posts might be a bit problematic....remember the trouble mitt Romney got in with his 47% quote. Not sure you disdain for peasant wagons will go down too well.
My disdain for peasant wagons is purely down to
1) They don't have seat belts, which is something I've always been told to wear in moving vehicles.
2) I'd use peasant wagons if they had a first class section to keep me away from the riff raff.
What are "peasant wagons?"
Buses.
Driving through city centres would be easier without them.
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 143 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 42 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 1 Green MP, 14 Independents
We can now add in the SNP (35) and see what happens if you assume Labour split like they did on their own bill, now they are whipped in favour (226/12)
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 226 Labour MPs, 35 SNP, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents (316) Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 12 Labour, 1 LD, 1 Green, 14 Ind (253)
Which passes comfortably. So you could play around with lab (and a handful of inds) a bit and still get a pass.
How many SNP mps ?
You're seeing things Big_G, I definitely did not forget GE 2017 happened
I really hope Common Market 2.0 is agreed. It's clearly the best compromise that honours the referendum result
I don't see how it can be said to honour the referendum result when it doesn't deliver on the key things the Leave campaign were presenting to people.
Leave presented a moon on the stick. And many people voted leave but actually don't mind Freedom of Labour - I'm one, I'm sure Richard Tyndall is another....
Indeed. There are rather a lot of us on here. Robert S is another who immediately springs to mind.
we would move to keeping the EU rules, simply giving up political influence over them. That is what you are suggesting?
At some point 99% of the population will say, this is silly, if we are having those rules we might as well have the political influence over them. And we’ll be back to square one?
That is certainly not what the Norway option means at all.
Stats don’t reveal truth when there are two different populations, climates, cultures, economies. Norway certainly has a bit of oil revenue to sweeten public spending and hence their populace’s perceptions. Yet each Norwegian household still pay almost as much into the EU as UK does now? That’s a funny definition of out?
Note - EEA payments are based on GDP and Norwegian GDP per capita is nearly double ours. Mental arithmetic implies taht our payments per capita under such a regime would be half our current ones.
Also - exempt from the majority of EU rules, and with a role in shaping the legislation that is applicable.
No. What is the benefit of their oil per head compared to ours? It has to be part of the equation if you think a political set up is working fine somewhere.
Customs Unions are complex. It isn't a case of customs unions good or customs unions bad.
The UK and the EU have a lot of options in how they draft their customs union and we shouldn't expect it to look like the Turkish one.
The UK could probably get the EU to insist on its inclusion in every trade agreement the EU makes. The UK has sufficient economic weight to make that attractive to both the EU and the third county. The customs union would have to include agriculture in that case (also needed for the Irish border). The UK would have to accept having the deals is more important than having an independent trade policy.
The UK would need to follow EU rules.
All the experts think a customs union should be considered and that a workable customs union is possible.
Again, that's all theory and it isn't tenable for the UK to be in a customs union (even if the EU agree to reciprocity on trade with non-EU partners) in the long term. The UK economy is simply too big not to have an independent trade and regulatory policy. It would be a good place to land for 5-7 years but beyond that we'd need to develop our own trade policy and independent regulatory standards, especially for the services sector where our markets are far more developed than the EU.
Customs unions don't apply to services. It's not all or nothing on trade policy as it applies to customs unions either. We can tap into the EU and get a set of arrangements that deliver much less friction in our trade overall, but at the cost of doing what we are told
Are we allowed to use the word vassalage without being accused of promoting violence?
To put it more technically, we would move to keeping the EU rules, simply giving up political influence over them. That is what you are suggesting?
At some point 99% of the population will say, this is silly, if we are having those rules we might as well have the political influence over them. And we’ll be back to square one?
That is certainly not what the Norway option means at all.
Stats don’t reveal truth when there are two different populations, climates, cultures, economies. Norway certainly has a bit of oil revenue to sweeten public spending and hence their populace’s perceptions. Yet each Norwegian household still pay almost as much into the EU as UK does now? That’s a funny definition of out?
No it doesn't. Some of us on here looked in detail at this around the time of the referendum and the UK equivalent commitment if we had a Norway Deal would be something around £3bn a year. It is massively less than now.
You are also wrong on the influence that Norway has over policy making as part of the EEA agreement.
Not quite sure that is a good example for brexit, as it’s not entirely honest to say they are out of it in the way a true brexit will allow us to say it
That report cites 69.7% of directives and 17.5% of regulations for a total of 28.1% of the EU acquis (page 795 of the report cited in Full Fact).
Those who want to spin it in a certain way cite the first number and round it up to 75%.
(Seriously, am I the only person who actually reads cited links and reports?)
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 143 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 42 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 1 Green MP, 14 Independents
We can now add in the SNP (35) and see what happens if you assume Labour split like they did on their own bill, now they are whipped in favour (226/12)
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 226 Labour MPs, 35 SNP, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents (316) Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 12 Labour, 1 LD, 1 Green, 14 Ind (253)
Which passes comfortably. So you could play around with lab (and a handful of inds) a bit and still get a pass.
How many SNP mps ?
You're seeing things Big_G, I definitely did not forget GE 2017 happened
Just watching the Laura K doc on Brexit (BBC 2). A scene where T May arrives and gets miked up for interview.
How on earth did someone this socially awkward, shy, and frankly, almost heartbreakingly lost in other people's company, become PM?
Indeed, why would they want to. Her every day must be a living hell of anxiety.
I mean, she presumably knows Laura pretty well given her decade or two of party activism at the highest levels?
Genuinely jaw dropping.
I'll always maintin she only ran for the leadership to try and secure her place as Home Secretary in a Boris government.
She'd had her run-ins with Boris and at that time all the talk was that Boris and Gove would keep Osborne on as CofE. So she was facing enemies all around her and probably thought she was for the chop (or certainly a serious demotion) unless she had a decent run in the leadership election.
But then Boris and Gove blew each other up and she was the last man (woman) standing.
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 143 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 42 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 1 Green MP, 14 Independents
We can now add in the SNP (35) and see what happens if you assume Labour split like they did on their own bill, now they are whipped in favour (226/12)
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 226 Labour MPs, 35 SNP, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents (306) Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 12 Labour, 1 LD, 1 Green, 14 Ind (253)
Which passes comfortably. So you could play around with lab (and a handful of inds) a bit and still get a pass.
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 143 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 42 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 1 Green MP, 14 Independents
We can now add in the SNP (35) and see what happens if you assume Labour split like they did on their own bill, now they are whipped in favour (226/12)
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 226 Labour MPs, 35 SNP, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents (316) Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 12 Labour, 1 LD, 1 Green, 14 Ind (253)
Which passes comfortably. So you could play around with lab (and a handful of inds) a bit and still get a pass.
How many SNP mps ?
You're seeing things Big_G, I definitely did not forget GE 2017 happened
I have no idea what you are talking about. There are 35 snps in the HOC
Apparently we still have to wait another hour for this ridiculously slow vote count to be completed, but rumour has it (according to the BBC) that the outcome is going to be No No No No.
At this rate it really is going to come down to a Revoke vs No Deal ballot on April 11th.
In all seriousness, I would have thought the best case scenario for the government tonight would be, short of nothing receiving more ayes than nays at all, then at least the WA should still have the second highest number of ayes, so a tie on CU at 274 would work out for them.
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 143 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 42 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 1 Green MP, 14 Independents
We can now add in the SNP (35) and see what happens if you assume Labour split like they did on their own bill, now they are whipped in favour (226/12)
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 226 Labour MPs, 35 SNP, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents (316) Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 12 Labour, 1 LD, 1 Green, 14 Ind (253)
Which passes comfortably. So you could play around with lab (and a handful of inds) a bit and still get a pass.
How many SNP mps ?
You're seeing things Big_G, I definitely did not forget GE 2017 happened
I have no idea what you are talking about. There are 35 snps in the HOC
I made a mistake in my original post, which I have now corrected.
Apparently we still have to wait another hour for this ridiculously slow vote count to be completed, but rumour has it (according to the BBC) that the outcome is going to be No No No No.
At this rate it really is going to come down to a Revoke vs No Deal ballot on April 11th.
How could Common Market 2.0 fail with the SNP and Lab whipping for it?
Apparently we still have to wait another hour for this ridiculously slow vote count to be completed, but rumour has it (according to the BBC) that the outcome is going to be No No No No.
If true then enough is enough. Prorogue parliament and end this farce.
Comments
Still by then he will have millions in the bank and a great suntan (something that is definitely not available in Sheffield).
I fail to see what is surprising about Cox's statement, Parliament is sovereign under our constitution and he is simply reflecting that which has been the case since the Civil War and Glorious Revolution.
If anyone does not understand the royal prerogative it is you, in any case the royal prerogative is entirely within the interpretation of the Courts. May only holds office as Head of Her Majesty's government because she supposedly commands the confidence of Parliament to be the Queen's Minister, if she wanted the Queen could dismiss May tomorrow and choose another MP to be PM more likely to command support in the Commons if May tries to defy the will of Parliament. The Head of State in the UK is the Queen, not Theresa May, the royal prerogative and the Executive is thus the Crown with the Cabinet simply acting on behalf of the Crown.
The monarch remains constitutionally empowered to exercise the royal prerogative against the advice of the prime minister or the cabinet if, for example, the monarch felt to exercise it would be to try and explicitly override the will of Parliament. Article 1 of the Bill of Rights also states the "power of suspending the laws or the execution of laws by regal authority without consent of Parliament is illegal"
1) They don't have seat belts, which is something I've always been told to wear in moving vehicles.
2) I'd use peasant wagons if they had a first class section to keep me away from the riff raff.
✔
@LaylaMoran
Many grim faces tonight. I’ve decided to vote FOR PV and Revoke and not obstruct the softer options (abstain). I can’t in good conscience vote for any kind of Brexit but neither do I want a No Deal so that’s the compromise position I’ve taken.
https://twitter.com/snb19692/status/1112730705275035648
And has incorporated 75% of EU law into its own law
a Norway government reportwhich says “Norway has incorporated approximately three-quarters of all EU legislative acts into Norwegian legislation
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2016/07/20/how-much-do-non-eu-countries-give-up-for-access-to-the-single-market-more-than-brexiteers-will-like/
But by being semi detached member has adopted very large share of EU regulations – without any voice influencing them
Not quite sure that is a good example for brexit, as it’s not entirely honest to say they are out of it in the way a true brexit will allow us to say it
Why are they voting on this Common Market 2.0 thingy? My understanding is that it involves re-joining EFTA. Parliament can't do this unilaterally, it's not within the gift of the EU either, and the actual EFTA members do not appear to want us back. Therefore, is the entire proposition not merely yet another unicorn concept?
MPs might just as well debate the colonisation of Mars as a solution to Brexit, for all the good it will do.
https://twitter.com/LaylaMoran/status/1112635603240345605?s=19
https://twitter.com/EmmaLewellBuck/status/1112803853894930438?ref_src=twsrc^tfw|twcamp^tweetembed|twterm^1112803853894930438&ref_url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-47772688
Edit: Got confused, thought Boles was CU for a second, but of course that's Clarke's
Must have been such a wrench for her...
Stringer-Long(-Bailey)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-47776964
Others have claimed that the EU would not want the UK to join Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein in the Efta pillar of the EEA. This is also not true. Michel Barnier has repeatedly offered Norway Plus as the only Brexit deal that guarantees ‘frictionless trade’. It may be that some people in the European Commission, and some politicians in Norway and elsewhere, would prefer to create a new EEA pillar for the UK. But what matters is what the leader of Norway’s government and the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator think, and they are clear: the UK would be welcome to join Norway in the EEA and Efta'
https://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2018/12/nick-boles-demolishing-five-myths-about-norway-plus.html
Also - exempt from the majority of EU rules, and with a role in shaping the legislation that is applicable.
An amendment that can be supported across the House, has no unicorns and that the EU will readily accessible to:
Rudd-Dalyell
no x 4 methinks
https://www.regjeringen.no/contentassets/5d3982d042a2472eb1b20639cd8b2341/no/pdfs/nou201220120002000dddpdfs.pdf#page=795
And the Norwegians are involved in every stage of the development of new EEA legislation up to the final vote. The idea that they are just blindly taking laws from the EU is bullshit.
On the question of money, Norway pays around 300 million Euros a year to the EU for Single Market and programme access. The amount paid is based on GDP and with our larger GDP that amount would be around £3 billion.
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 143 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents
Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 42 Labour MPs, 1 Lib Dem, 1 Green MP, 14 Independents
We can now add in the SNP (35) and see what happens if you assume Labour split like they did on their own bill, now they are whipped in favour (226/12)
Voting in favour: 36 Conservatives, 226 Labour MPs, 35 SNP, 1 Lib Dem, 4 Plaid Cymru MPs, 4 Independents (306)
Voting against: 225 Conservatives, 12 Labour, 1 LD, 1 Green, 14 Ind (253)
Which passes comfortably. So you could play around with lab (and a handful of inds) a bit and still get a pass.
How on earth did someone this socially awkward, shy, and frankly, almost heartbreakingly lost in other people's company, become PM?
Indeed, why would they want to. Her every day must be a living hell of anxiety.
I mean, she presumably knows Laura pretty well given her decade or two of party activism at the highest levels?
Genuinely jaw dropping.
And 75% of laws dreamt up by EU for Norway to incorporate into theirs.
a Norway government reportwhich says “Norway has incorporated approximately three-quarters of all EU legislative acts into Norwegian legislation
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2016/07/20/how-much-do-non-eu-countries-give-up-for-access-to-the-single-market-more-than-brexiteers-will-like/
But by being semi detached member has adopted very large share of EU regulations – without any voice influencing them
Norway option. The truth?
No. What is the benefit of their oil per head compared to ours? It has to be part of the equation if you think a political set up is working fine somewhere.
Lynch-Law
Field-Gray
Wood-Turner
You may have hit on a way to make Parliament interesting!
Those who want to spin it in a certain way cite the first number and round it up to 75%.
(Seriously, am I the only person who actually reads cited links and reports?)
She'd had her run-ins with Boris and at that time all the talk was that Boris and Gove would keep Osborne on as CofE. So she was facing enemies all around her and probably thought she was for the chop (or certainly a serious demotion) unless she had a decent run in the leadership election.
But then Boris and Gove blew each other up and she was the last man (woman) standing.
https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/politics/newport-west-brexit-by-election-16043663?utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sharebar
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1112807736717332481
At this rate it really is going to come down to a Revoke vs No Deal ballot on April 11th.
In all seriousness, I would have thought the best case scenario for the government tonight would be, short of nothing receiving more ayes than nays at all, then at least the WA should still have the second highest number of ayes, so a tie on CU at 274 would work out for them.