Lol, someone has just gobbled up my 16.0 on UKIP for Newport. But very regrettably I hadn't left shorter prices on the table, since they were just matched at 3.0.
Looks to me like CM2 is starting to come up on the inside...
It's a win win win win.
Win - for its proponents (obviously). Win - for sense & sensibility, the most coherent deliverable non-hard brexit. Win - for Labour, no Tory PM can pursue it therefore the political crisis deepens. Win - for May, faced with this as the alternative her deal goes through at MV4 or 5.
This whipped abstention from the cabinet is an absolute nonsense. It's going to bite her when something gets through with 290 odd votes.
Indeed. At this moment of grave national crisis the PM and Cabinet girded their loins, faced the issues head on and led the country fearlessly toward .... er ....
And in addition to this, people forget the Conservatives only have 314 MPs now after three defections to the Tiggers, and Bercow not actually being part of the '318' elected. That's deep into minority territory. Even with the DUP, that's only 324 (Assuming the C&S agreement survives).
I wouldn't rule out Sinn Fein turning up for the LOLZ. It's certainly not the most batshit insane thing that's happened so far this year.
This whipped abstention from the cabinet is an absolute nonsense. It's going to bite her when something gets through with 290 odd votes.
Indeed. At this moment of grave national crisis the PM and Cabinet girded their loins, faced the issues head on and led the country fearlessly toward .... er ....
They are supposed to be listening to parliament, not the other way round. That's kinda the idea of the indicative votes, is it not?
This whipped abstention from the cabinet is an absolute nonsense. It's going to bite her when something gets through with 290 odd votes.
Indeed. At this moment of grave national crisis the PM and Cabinet girded their loins, faced the issues head on and led the country fearlessly toward .... er ....
They are supposed to be listening to parliament, not the other way round. That's kinda the idea of the indicative votes, is it not?
This whipped abstention from the cabinet is an absolute nonsense. It's going to bite her when something gets through with 290 odd votes.
Indeed. At this moment of grave national crisis the PM and Cabinet girded their loins, faced the issues head on and led the country fearlessly toward .... er ....
They are supposed to be listening to parliament, not the other way round. That's kinda the idea of the indicative votes, is it not?
This whipped abstention from the cabinet is an absolute nonsense. It's going to bite her when something gets through with 290 odd votes.
Indeed. At this moment of grave national crisis the PM and Cabinet girded their loins, faced the issues head on and led the country fearlessly toward .... er ....
They are supposed to be listening to parliament, not the other way round. That's kinda the idea of the indicative votes, is it not?
The cabinet is a part of parliament too though !
Presumably they already know what they themselves think... hmm, I take the point...
Airbus UK factories “could well remain competitive,” even after Brexit, outgoing CEO Tom Enders said Mar. 29.
British sites enjoy lower cost levels than do sites in France and Germany, Enders said. “Our unions do not like to hear this, but it’s the reality,” he told reporters in Munich. Among other things, Airbus builds the wings for all of its commercial aircraft in the UK. “Our British colleagues are very productive.”
NEW - Downing Street sources confirm whipping for tonight - Tory MPs will be instructed to vote against the business motion, setting up indicative votes; given free votes on the Brexit options; but cabinet ministers will (again) be ordered to abstain.
That is poor. It doesn't cover their divisions and just delays knowing the full picture and artificially lowers some options
As a Remainer I’m beginning to get seriously pissed off with the Peoples Vote .
This all or nothing approach isn’t going to work . They need to accept a compromise and support Common Market 2.0. At least those in the opposition need to support both but to vote against that seems very shortsighted .
This does deliver quite a lot for Leavers . Boles and co though need to stress how the UK could add some restrictions on freedom of movement .
Don’t get me wrong if a second vote happened I would be very happy but at this point it’s hard to see that .
Have the EU signalled they would agree to compromise on their four freedoms? Seems to be a bit of a shot in the dark.
They wouldn't compromise on the 'four freedoms'. We'd be subject to the full freedom of movement directive, plus obviously conforming to EU regulations on goods and services etc, adhering to the state subsidy rules, paying a fat fee (although probably less than as a full member), and probably EU environmental law and the social chapter. It really would not be very much different from full EU membership except we'd be out of the political structures, have no say (other than the right to lobby, like Norway) in regulations, and probably be out of the CAP and CFP (although the latter could be contentious).
It seems a daft idea to me - we might as well remain full members if we're going to accept all that lot - but if those who voted Leave can be conned into acquiescing in it, I suppose it has merit as a face-saving option, certainly compared with the full-on disaster of crashing out.
Edit: Corrected missing 'not' from 'It really would not be very much different..'
And yet it is pretty well what a minority of those who voted leave advocated for in the first place, and satisfies the referendum vote of leaving the EU.
I entirely agree that we might as well remain as full members. But as we’ve seen, there is not even close to a majority in Parliament for revoking. That is not an argument against a consensus least worst option.
As a Remainer I’m beginning to get seriously pissed off with the Peoples Vote .
This all or nothing approach isn’t going to work . They need to accept a compromise and support Common Market 2.0. At least those in the opposition need to support both but to vote against that seems very shortsighted .
This does deliver quite a lot for Leavers . Boles and co though need to stress how the UK could add some restrictions on freedom of movement .
Don’t get me wrong if a second vote happened I would be very happy but at this point it’s hard to see that .
As a Remainer I’m beginning to get seriously pissed off with the Peoples Vote .
This all or nothing approach isn’t going to work . They need to accept a compromise and support Common Market 2.0. At least those in the opposition need to support both but to vote against that seems very shortsighted .
This does deliver quite a lot for Leavers . Boles and co though need to stress how the UK could add some restrictions on freedom of movement .
Don’t get me wrong if a second vote happened I would be very happy but at this point it’s hard to see that .
Have the EU signalled they would agree to compromise on their four freedoms? Seems to be a bit of a shot in the dark.
They wouldn't compromise on the 'four freedoms'. We'd be subject to the full freedom of movement directive, plus obviously conforming to EU regulations on goods and services etc, adhering to the state subsidy rules, paying a fat fee (although probably less than as a full member), and probably EU environmental law and the social chapter. It really would not be very much different from full EU membership except we'd be out of the political structures, have no say (other than the right to lobby, like Norway) in regulations, and probably be out of the CAP and CFP (although the latter could be contentious).
It seems a daft idea to me - we might as well remain full members if we're going to accept all that lot - but if those who voted Leave can be conned into acquiescing in it, I suppose it has merit as a face-saving option, certainly compared with the full-on disaster of crashing out.
Edit: Corrected missing 'not' from 'It really would not be very much different..'
The bit I don't understand about it is that it would only be part of the PD which is in no way legally binding. As such it would only take a harder (than CM2) Brexit leader of the Tory party who is half way electable to take over from May and we could see the whole thing ignored by the British in the next phase. If I were a Soft Brexit/Remain supporter I would be very dubious about supporting this as a mean as of getting a softer Brexit.
As a Remainer I’m beginning to get seriously pissed off with the Peoples Vote .
This all or nothing approach isn’t going to work . They need to accept a compromise and support Common Market 2.0. At least those in the opposition need to support both but to vote against that seems very shortsighted .
This does deliver quite a lot for Leavers . Boles and co though need to stress how the UK could add some restrictions on freedom of movement .
Don’t get me wrong if a second vote happened I would be very happy but at this point it’s hard to see that .
Agreed. CM 2.0 is a fair compromise. They should certainly vote for it.
There is no way on god's earth trump is a single figure golfer. As a youth I played a lot and got down to 5, and to get past that you have to be really really good. One look at that swing and it is more 28 than 2.8
The key point is that any alternative approach needs a long extension. Unless you believe the suggestions this lunchtime that a CU PD could be quickly negotiated in time for exit on 12 April.
Exactly, that is the point. Which is why PV supporters should not be worried about backing CM2. It will require a long delay while the details are worked out, and when the details are worked out it will be seen that it is not really a very sensible way forward as it keeps the UK in the EU economic structure without any say in the political structure. So there would be little point in leaving. When people realise that the pressure for reversal will grow.
It would require no real extension at all beyond the May 22nd date. Since it is only for insertion into the PD rather than the WA it could be arranged very quickly. It needs no detail as the PD is only a list of aspirations.
I would expect the EU to jump at the chance to get this over the line and then worry about the negotiations of the final details over the two year transition period.
Spot on. People on this forum are far, far too easily bogged down by overanalyses of the technicalities – witness the ludicrous contentions the other day that actually we would leave on 29 March despite the fact that the PM and EU had already announced otherwise.
Like you, Richard, I am minded to analyse situations through the prism of the players' incentives. As the EU have a huge incentive to validate CM 2.0, it wouldn't pose a difficult journey.
Common Market 2.0 does everything except address how the referendum campaign was won. Anything that junks the anti-immigration message that won can reasonably be criticised as incompatible with its (malign) spirit.
The bit I don't understand about it is that it would only be part of the PD which is in no way legally binding. As such it would only take a harder (than CM2) Brexit leader of the Tory party who is half way electable to take over from May and we could see the whole thing ignored by the British in the next phase. If I were a Soft Brexit/Remain supporter I would be very dubious about supporting this as a mean as of getting a softer Brexit.
That's true, but then it is equally true of any option that the future government which ends up doing the negotiation of the next stage can't easily be bound now. It might not even be the same parliament.
CM 2.0 is certainly better than CU, Norway vs Turkey. I've realised just how atrocious a "a CU" option could be as an exporter over the weekend. True CM 2.0 has a de facto CU with the backstop, but that is THE CU not A CU (Which is fine)
Most of the names are failures just jockeying for a future Cabinet place. Those with a genuine chance in my view are Boris, who is a marmite character, Raab, who is being wrongly smeared by May’s office, Hunt, who has done nothing except alienate the medical profession and junior doctors in particular, and Gove, whose credibility is shot having alienated the teachers and stabbed both Cameron and Boris in the back.
Out of that lot Raab has the best chance I think as he's got the fewest enemies... Although the Murdoch press will support Hunt for what that's worth these days...
Rudd and Stewart are the two humans, and possibly Liddington aswell.
However I think only a Brexiter will be supported.
Rudd will be out at the next election. She's done.
Rory The Tory has no Cabinet experience.
Liddington? Can't see it but you never know...
Whatever happened to the boundary review proposal coming back to the Commons?
As a Remainer I’m beginning to get seriously pissed off with the Peoples Vote .
This all or nothing approach isn’t going to work . They need to accept a compromise and support Common Market 2.0. At least those in the opposition need to support both but to vote against that seems very shortsighted .
This does deliver quite a lot for Leavers . Boles and co though need to stress how the UK could add some restrictions on freedom of movement .
Don’t get me wrong if a second vote happened I would be very happy but at this point it’s hard to see that .
Have the EU signalled they would agree to compromise on their four freedoms? Seems to be a bit of a shot in the dark.
They wouldn't compromise on the 'four freedoms'. We'd be subject to the full freedom of movement directive, plus obviously conforming to EU regulations on goods and services etc, adhering to the state subsidy rules, paying a fat fee (although probably less than as a full member), and probably EU environmental law and the social chapter. It really would not be very much different from full EU membership except we'd be out of the political structures, have no say (other than the right to lobby, like Norway) in regulations, and probably be out of the CAP and CFP (although the latter could be contentious).
It seems a daft idea to me - we might as well remain full members if we're going to accept all that lot - but if those who voted Leave can be conned into acquiescing in it, I suppose it has merit as a face-saving option, certainly compared with the full-on disaster of crashing out.
Edit: Corrected missing 'not' from 'It really would not be very much different..'
The bit I don't understand about it is that it would only be part of the PD which is in no way legally binding. As such it would only take a harder (than CM2) Brexit leader of the Tory party who is half way electable to take over from May and we could see the whole thing ignored by the British in the next phase. If I were a Soft Brexit/Remain supporter I would be very dubious about supporting this as a mean as of getting a softer Brexit.
I experienced the same bafflement over this radged scheme. All they would really be voting for is May's fucking shit deal.
There is no way on god's earth trump is a single figure golfer. As a youth I played a lot and got down to 5, and to get past that you have to be really really good. One look at that swing and it is more 28 than 2.8
6'3, 240 pounds and a handicap under 3.
It will come as no surprise that the low-life Trumpton cheats at golf.
It would require no real extension at all beyond the May 22nd date. Since it is only for insertion into the PD rather than the WA it could be arranged very quickly. It needs no detail as the PD is only a list of aspirations.
I would expect the EU to jump at the chance to get this over the line and then worry about the negotiations of the final details over the two year transition period.
Yes, if CM2 wins and is agreed for PD purposes, or indeed CU, or even if the May deal returns and beats everything, the upshot is the same - the WA passes and we leave on 22/5 or soon after. No Euro elections.
Then a new Tory leader and a GE to decide the target Future Relationship for phase 2 and who will be running with it. The Labour and Tory manifesto for that election will trump whatever is in the PD.
This is what we are looking at, I think, unless Labour are sufficiently disciplined to block everything in the hope of forcing a long extension and/or triggering a snap crisis GE pre leaving.
As a Remainer I’m beginning to get seriously pissed off with the Peoples Vote .
This all or nothing approach isn’t going to work . They need to accept a compromise and support Common Market 2.0. At least those in the opposition need to support both but to vote against that seems very shortsighted .
This does deliver quite a lot for Leavers . Boles and co though need to stress how the UK could add some restrictions on freedom of movement .
Don’t get me wrong if a second vote happened I would be very happy but at this point it’s hard to see that .
Have the EU signalled they would agree to compromise on their four freedoms? Seems to be a bit of a shot in the dark.
They wouldn't compromise on the 'four freedoms'. We'd be subject to the full freedom of movement directive, plus obviously conforming to EU regulations on goods and services etc, adhering to the state subsidy rules, paying a fat fee (although probably less than as a full member), and probably EU environmental law and the social chapter. It really would not be very much different from full EU membership except we'd be out of the political structures, have no say (other than the right to lobby, like Norway) in regulations, and probably be out of the CAP and CFP (although the latter could be contentious).
It seems a daft idea to me - we might as well remain full members if we're going to accept all that lot - but if those who voted Leave can be conned into acquiescing in it, I suppose it has merit as a face-saving option, certainly compared with the full-on disaster of crashing out.
Edit: Corrected missing 'not' from 'It really would not be very much different..'
The bit I don't understand about it is that it would only be part of the PD which is in no way legally binding. As such it would only take a harder (than CM2) Brexit leader of the Tory party who is half way electable to take over from May and we could see the whole thing ignored by the British in the next phase. If I were a Soft Brexit/Remain supporter I would be very dubious about supporting this as a mean as of getting a softer Brexit.
I experienced the same bafflement over this radged scheme. All they would really be voting for is May's fucking shit deal.
Common Market 2.0 does everything except address how the referendum campaign was won. Anything that junks the anti-immigration message that won can reasonably be criticised as incompatible with its (malign) spirit.
I expect a lot of MP's are so shell-shocked, they just want to get anything over the line.
Common Market 2.0 does everything except address how the referendum campaign was won. Anything that junks the anti-immigration message that won can reasonably be criticised as incompatible with its (malign) spirit.
Well, Leavers know what to do.
Ring or text ERG members and get them to vote for Brexit i.e. May's deal.
This doesn't seem to have received much attention, but if it's correct it is a really major development:
Meanwhile the Evening Standard can reveal that Attorney General Geoffrey Cox has warned Cabinet ministers that they are powerless to stop a soft Brexit if a cross-party group of MPs succeeds in getting an Act of Parliament passed this week.
Mr Cox’s verdict that the Government faces being legally out-gunned by Parliament is significant as it means that the Cabinet’s own legal chief believes that Sir Oliver Letwin’s plan to use an Act of Parliament to require a softer Brexit plan will have the full force of the law behind it.
Mr Cox is understood to have told at least two groups of ministers that any attempt to ignore or challenge the Act would be doomed to failure.
Mr Cox warned them that the Government could be obliged by the courts to show “good faith” and strive to implement the decision of Parliament.
Common Market 2.0 does everything except address how the referendum campaign was won. Anything that junks the anti-immigration message that won can reasonably be criticised as incompatible with its (malign) spirit.
Well, Leavers know what to do.
Ring or text ERG members and get them to vote for Brexit i.e. May's deal.
In fairness, most of the ERG now realise. But, The Spartans are beyond reasoning with.
Common Market 2.0 does everything except address how the referendum campaign was won. Anything that junks the anti-immigration message that won can reasonably be criticised as incompatible with its (malign) spirit.
Well, as has been discussed before 48% cited Remain and a chunk of the 52% that voted Leave support free movement. Ergo, it's a fair compromise that respects the result of the referendum. MPs need to move on.
Common Market 2.0 does everything except address how the referendum campaign was won. Anything that junks the anti-immigration message that won can reasonably be criticised as incompatible with its (malign) spirit.
I expect a lot of MP's are so shell-shocked, they just want to get anything over the line.
Or if you've reached the conclusion that the Gov't will always tonnes of immigration (Even if you personally aren't a fan) regardless of whether we're outside or inside the EU. Common Market 2.0 is definitely superior to CU anyway I think !
Was pootling through the Chilterns yesterday and somebody had put up a large hand-painted sign, on the side of the dual carriageway, saying "We voted LEAVE. Anything else is TREACHERY."
I haven't been out and about much recently. If this now a normal thing?
I was out and about in the East Riding and saw a placard outside someone's house quoting from the Levellers declaration of independence.
So maybe it is.
"...yet such hath been the wicked policies of those who from time to time have endeavoured to bring this Nation into bondage; that they have in all times either by the disuse or abuse of Parliaments deprived the people of their hopes..."
Common Market 2.0 does everything except address how the referendum campaign was won. Anything that junks the anti-immigration message that won can reasonably be criticised as incompatible with its (malign) spirit.
Well, as has been discussed before 48% cited Remain and a chunk of the 52% that voted Leave support free movement. Ergo, it's a fair compromise that respects the result of the referendum. MPs need to move on.
Does that count those who voted Remain in spite of freedom of movement?
Chris Bryant has just said he will vote for common market 2 but he thinks it is an unicorn because there will be a legally binding negotiating mandate for the HMG, as no one can bind any future government in negotiations
If that is true, common market 2 is an attempt to pull the wool over people's eyes
Common Market 2.0 does everything except address how the referendum campaign was won. Anything that junks the anti-immigration message that won can reasonably be criticised as incompatible with its (malign) spirit.
Well, as has been discussed before 48% cited Remain and a chunk of the 52% that voted Leave support free movement. Ergo, it's a fair compromise that respects the result of the referendum. MPs need to move on.
Probably a fair number of the 48% don't like F o M, but I think most people just want the Commons to take a decision.
Most of the names are failures just jockeying for a future Cabinet place. Those with a genuine chance in my view are Boris, who is a marmite character, Raab, who is being wrongly smeared by May’s office, Hunt, who has done nothing except alienate the medical profession and junior doctors in particular, and Gove, whose credibility is shot having alienated the teachers and stabbed both Cameron and Boris in the back.
Out of that lot Raab has the best chance I think as he's got the fewest enemies... Although the Murdoch press will support Hunt for what that's worth these days...
Raab is a lightweight and a moron. He couldn't hack it as Brexit secretary. Yeah: May undermined him. So what? He should have been a damn sight tougher. If he can't deal with that, he doesn't have the balls needed to be leader or PM.
Frankly, no-one in the Cabinet particularly impresses. The Tories are split, are messing up the country and need to go away into a darkened corner and grow up before bothering the rest of us.
His academic record suggests otherwise to the accusation of being a moron. His employment record before before becoming an MP pushes strongly back against your accusation. Something to do with Westminster perhaps.
He did not understand about the importance of the Dover-Calais route to our trade. I don't give two hoots about his academic record. I have spent over three decades dealing with people with fantastic academic records who are as stupid as fuck. Being good at whatever he was doing before he became an MP says nothing about his achievements as an MP and there and in Cabinet he has not distinguished himself. He looks - and is - out of his depth.
Not exactly what he said about Dover-Calais
He said he didn’t realise it was “quite as significant” as it was.
That’s a relative statement rather than the absolute one you report
Chris Bryant has just said he will vote for common market 2 but he thinks it is an unicorn because there will be a legally binding negotiating mandate for the HMG, as no one can bind any future government in negotiations
If that is true, common market 2 is an attempt to pull the wool over people's eyes
Well it is from the get go as the common market that most people remember us joining (and would overwhelmingly win a majority with the public) doesn't exist anymore nor anything close to it.
Chris Bryant has just said he will vote for common market 2 but he thinks it is an unicorn because there will be a legally binding negotiating mandate for the HMG, as no one can bind any future government in negotiations
If that is true, common market 2 is an attempt to pull the wool over people's eyes
Isn't the 2016 Referendum result binding this government at the moment?
Common Market 2.0 does everything except address how the referendum campaign was won. Anything that junks the anti-immigration message that won can reasonably be criticised as incompatible with its (malign) spirit.
Well, as has been discussed before 48% cited Remain and a chunk of the 52% that voted Leave support free movement. Ergo, it's a fair compromise that respects the result of the referendum. MPs need to move on.
Does that count those who voted Remain in spite of freedom of movement?
They voted for the status quo which included FOM. So Remain + Tyndallite Leave, is a decent compromise.
I thought the whole point of these votes were that they weren't to be whipped so that they truly showed the view of the house, not what the party leaders want?
Surely if it is whipped it gives cover to the government to ignore it as they can say it wasn't a free vote.
You’ve spotted Corbyn’s cunning plan...
(Convince Remainers he’s in their side while at the same time undermining their cause in favour of no deal)
I thought the whole point of these votes were that they weren't to be whipped so that they truly showed the view of the house, not what the party leaders want?
Surely if it is whipped it gives cover to the government to ignore it as they can say it wasn't a free vote.
You’ve spotted Corbyn’s cunning plan...
(Convince Remainers he’s in their side while at the same time undermining their cause in favour of no deal)
Sounds a bit too clever for uncle thickie to have come up with that plan.
Chris Bryant has just said he will vote for common market 2 but he thinks it is an unicorn because there will be a legally binding negotiating mandate for the HMG, as no one can bind any future government in negotiations
If that is true, common market 2 is an attempt to pull the wool over people's eyes
Find the will first, the way later.
So far, we haven't even got an expressed will – so this would mark serious progress.
P.S. I think it will lose narrowly. Hope I am wrong.
Chris Bryant has just said he will vote for common market 2 but he thinks it is an unicorn because there will be a legally binding negotiating mandate for the HMG, as no one can bind any future government in negotiations
If that is true, common market 2 is an attempt to pull the wool over people's eyes
Isn't the 2016 Referendum result binding this government at the moment?
Thw WDA is the treaty, common market 2 would be in the non binding political declaration
Common Market 2.0 does everything except address how the referendum campaign was won. Anything that junks the anti-immigration message that won can reasonably be criticised as incompatible with its (malign) spirit.
Well, as has been discussed before 48% cited Remain and a chunk of the 52% that voted Leave support free movement. Ergo, it's a fair compromise that respects the result of the referendum. MPs need to move on.
I reckon there's way more of the 48% who don't like FoM but voted Remain for other reasons, than those of the 52% who do support FoM.
Was pootling through the Chilterns yesterday and somebody had put up a large hand-painted sign, on the side of the dual carriageway, saying "We voted LEAVE. Anything else is TREACHERY."
I haven't been out and about much recently. If this now a normal thing?
I was out and about in the East Riding and saw a placard outside someone's house quoting from the Levellers declaration of independence.
So maybe it is.
"...yet such hath been the wicked policies of those who from time to time have endeavoured to bring this Nation into bondage; that they have in all times either by the disuse or abuse of Parliaments deprived the people of their hopes..."
Common Market 2.0 does everything except address how the referendum campaign was won. Anything that junks the anti-immigration message that won can reasonably be criticised as incompatible with its (malign) spirit.
Well, as has been discussed before 48% cited Remain and a chunk of the 52% that voted Leave support free movement. Ergo, it's a fair compromise that respects the result of the referendum. MPs need to move on.
Does that count those who voted Remain in spite of freedom of movement?
Sure but if you voted remain in spite of FoM concerns then you weighed up that leaving would be more hassle than the FoM was. Enough leavers to make the difference wouldn't be overly concerned about immigration either. Ergo you get to over 50%.
I thought the whole point of these votes were that they weren't to be whipped so that they truly showed the view of the house, not what the party leaders want?
Surely if it is whipped it gives cover to the government to ignore it as they can say it wasn't a free vote.
You’ve spotted Corbyn’s cunning plan...
(Convince Remainers he’s in their side while at the same time undermining their cause in favour of no deal)
Sounds a bit too clever for uncle thickie to have come up with that plan.
Nothing says he came up with it. But he can follow it
As a Remainer I’m beginning to get seriously pissed off with the Peoples Vote .
This all or nothing approach isn’t going to work . They need to accept a compromise and support Common Market 2.0. At least those in the opposition need to support both but to vote against that seems very shortsighted .
This does deliver quite a lot for Leavers . Boles and co though need to stress how the UK could add some restrictions on freedom of movement .
Don’t get me wrong if a second vote happened I would be very happy but at this point it’s hard to see that .
The problem is that if you pass the WA we are out of the EU, the leverage is gone, and the dream of Remain is dead.
OK, so the stated aim at that point could be a very closely aligned trade deal but this is not binding. Given that the Tories are about to change leader, the risk is that the new PM (perhaps following a general election which they win) would pursue maximum divergence and would, if necessary, walk away from the WA.
Oddly, the best chance of PV happening is the entrance into number 10 of the person the PV crowd seem to hate so much - Jeremy Corbyn.
CM 2.0 is certainly better than CU, Norway vs Turkey. I've realised just how atrocious a "a CU" option could be as an exporter over the weekend. True CM 2.0 has a de facto CU with the backstop, but that is THE CU not A CU (Which is fine)
Why atrocious? Customs unions aren't magic bullets, nor will this one make up for the loss of business incurred by leaving the European Union. But the only question is whether being in a customs union is better than not being in one. As long as you are sensible about how you put your customs union together you will less friction of trade, which is surely a good thing for exporters?
Most of the names are failures just jockeying for a future Cabinet place. Those with a genuine chance in my view are Boris, who is a marmite character, Raab, who is being wrongly smeared by May’s office, Hunt, who has done nothing except alienate the medical profession and junior doctors in particular, and Gove, whose credibility is shot having alienated the teachers and stabbed both Cameron and Boris in the back.
Out of that lot Raab has the best chance I think as he's got the fewest enemies... Although the Murdoch press will support Hunt for what that's worth these days...
Raab is a lightweight and a moron. He couldn't hack it as Brexit secretary. Yeah: May undermined him. So what? He should have been a damn sight tougher. If he can't deal with that, he doesn't have the balls needed to be leader or PM.
Frankly, no-one in the Cabinet particularly impresses. The Tories are split, are messing up the country and need to go away into a darkened corner and grow up before bothering the rest of us.
His academic record suggests otherwise to the accusation of being a moron. His employment record before before becoming an MP pushes strongly back against your accusation. Something to do with Westminster perhaps.
He did not understand about the importance of the Dover-Calais route to our trade. I don't give two hoots about his academic record. I have spent over three decades dealing with people with fantastic academic records who are as stupid as fuck. Being good at whatever he was doing before he became an MP says nothing about his achievements as an MP and there and in Cabinet he has not distinguished himself. He looks - and is - out of his depth.
Not exactly what he said about Dover-Calais
He said he didn’t realise it was “quite as significant” as it was.
That’s a relative statement rather than the absolute one you report
I don't think there is a contradiction. But in any case it hardly helps his case, does it? Not quite as significant as what, exactly? Our exports from the port of Liverpool perhaps? Or Maryport? For God's sake, the first thing a Brexit secretary should have done is got a briefing on our trade and what routes it uses. He might even have thought to get such a briefing before he became a Brexiteer and started campaigning for us to leave.
CM2.0 was rejected by 95 votes last week, what's changed to get it over the line this week?
panic and desperation
Are the SNP going to back it this time? That would close nearly half the gap.
Yes, they are. 35 of the votes needed (they abstained last time)..
I support a 2nd referendum, but MPs who use that to oppose reasonable compromise are exhausting my patience (and that includes the whole independent group, a couple of whom I count as personal friends).
Chris Bryant has just said he will vote for common market 2 but he thinks it is an unicorn because there will be a legally binding negotiating mandate for the HMG, as no one can bind any future government in negotiations
If that is true, common market 2 is an attempt to pull the wool over people's eyes
Common Market 2 is nothing more than a clever slogan. Ranks alongside take back control and independent trade policy. Rather better than Brexit means Brexit. But there is no substance, it means different things to different people and if it is ever defined in detail it will lose a lot of the support it now has. It is merely a step on the road to reversing Brexit, and, if it gets a majority, quite a significant one at that.
If something like CM2 passes, but opposition in the Conservative Party is so intense that the government can't accept it, then I think the government has no choice but to go into Opposition.
If something like CM2 passes, but opposition in the Conservative Party is so intense that the government can't accept it, then I think the government has no choice but to go into Opposition.
Or a Deal/Remain referendum. Brexiteers could acquiesce because it's better for them than an enforced Soft Brexit, and it poses a strategic problem for Labour.
CM2.0 was rejected by 95 votes last week, what's changed to get it over the line this week?
SNP whipping in favour instead of abstaining closes the gap by 35 (down to 60)
Labour whipping in favour instead of mildly encouraging. Last time they had about 42 against and about 60 abstentions on it - that could be enough to get it over the line. If 10-20 of the 42 switch, the gap goes down to 20-40; if 40 of the abstentions go aye instead, it's over the line.
I thought the whole point of these votes were that they weren't to be whipped so that they truly showed the view of the house, not what the party leaders want?
Surely if it is whipped it gives cover to the government to ignore it as they can say it wasn't a free vote.
You’ve spotted Corbyn’s cunning plan...
(Convince Remainers he’s in their side while at the same time undermining their cause in favour of no deal)
Sounds a bit too clever for uncle thickie to have come up with that plan.
Oh he didn’t come up with it - he’s just the branding
Most of the names are failures just jockeying for a future Cabinet place. Those with a genuine chance in my view are Boris, who is a marmite character, Raab, who is being wrongly smeared by May’s office, Hunt, who has done nothing except alienate the medical profession and junior doctors in particular, and Gove, whose credibility is shot having alienated the teachers and stabbed both Cameron and Boris in the back.
Out of that lot Raab has the best chance I think as he's got the fewest enemies... Although the Murdoch press will support Hunt for what that's worth these days...
Raab is a lightweight and a moron. He couldn't hack it as Brexit secretary. Yeah: May undermined him. So what? He should have been a damn sight tougher. If he can't deal with that, he doesn't have the balls needed to be leader or PM.
Frankly, no-one in the Cabinet particularly impresses. The Tories are split, are messing up the country and need to go away into a darkened corner and grow up before bothering the rest of us.
His academic record suggests otherwise to the accusation of being a moron. His employment record before before becoming an MP pushes strongly back against your accusation. Something to do with Westminster perhaps.
He did not understand about the importance of the Dover-Calais route to our trade. I don't give two hoots about his academic record. I have spent over three decades dealing with people with fantastic academic records who are as stupid as fuck. Being good at whatever he was doing before he became an MP says nothing about his achievements as an MP and there and in Cabinet he has not distinguished himself. He looks - and is - out of his depth.
Not exactly what he said about Dover-Calais
He said he didn’t realise it was “quite as significant” as it was.
That’s a relative statement rather than the absolute one you report
I don't think there is a contradiction. But in any case it hardly helps his case, does it? Not quite as significant as what, exactly? Our exports from the port of Liverpool perhaps? Or Maryport? For God's sake, the first thing a Brexit secretary should have done is got a briefing on our trade and what routes it uses. He might even have thought to get such a briefing before he became a Brexiteer and started campaigning for us to leave.
Raab also said he didn't read the 35-page Good Friday Agreement in full because it's not "a cracking read".
If something like CM2 passes, but opposition in the Conservative Party is so intense that the government can't accept it, then I think the government has no choice but to go into Opposition.
Or a Deal/Remain referendum. Brexiteers could acquiesce because it's better for them than an enforced Soft Brexit, and it poses a strategic problem for Labour.
Almost no one in the Conservative Party supports it.
If something like CM2 passes, but opposition in the Conservative Party is so intense that the government can't accept it, then I think the government has no choice but to go into Opposition.
Or a Deal/Remain referendum. Brexiteers could acquiesce because it's better for them than an enforced Soft Brexit, and it poses a strategic problem for Labour.
Almost no one in the Conservative Party supports it.
That's to be expected of the least worst option.
By the way, there was quite a strong contingent of Conservatives for a Peoples' Vote on the march in London.
Any outcome other than those two contains the backstop. If you're opposed to the backstop then you're opposed to CU, CM2.0, May's deal on it's own, Labour's alternative plan or anything else for that matter.
Chris Bryant has just said he will vote for common market 2 but he thinks it is an unicorn because there will be a legally binding negotiating mandate for the HMG, as no one can bind any future government in negotiations
If that is true, common market 2 is an attempt to pull the wool over people's eyes
Common Market 2 is nothing more than a clever slogan. Ranks alongside take back control and independent trade policy. Rather better than Brexit means Brexit. But there is no substance, it means different things to different people and if it is ever defined in detail it will lose a lot of the support it now has. It is merely a step on the road to reversing Brexit, and, if it gets a majority, quite a significant one at that.
Exactly. You need to give people a way to climb down. Most people don't actively want to harm the country. So you say, here is a solution that respects the result and minimises the damage. You sort out the nitty gritty stuff later. Then people can decide if not having a say is worse than going through another referendum.
If something like CM2 passes, but opposition in the Conservative Party is so intense that the government can't accept it, then I think the government has no choice but to go into Opposition.
Or a Deal/Remain referendum. Brexiteers could acquiesce because it's better for them than an enforced Soft Brexit, and it poses a strategic problem for Labour.
Almost no one in the Conservative Party supports it.
Well that's scuppered that then. It's about time the country realised it should stop trying to put its interests before those of the Conservative Party!
If we do end up going to Norway, Remainers will forever be toasting the Spartans and Theresa May for refusing to accept the far harder Customs Union compromise that would surely have got through, given Theresa May's initial willingness to discuss customs arrangements.
As a Remainer I’m beginning to get seriously pissed off with the Peoples Vote .
This all or nothing approach isn’t going to work . They need to accept a compromise and support Common Market 2.0. At least those in the opposition need to support both but to vote against that seems very shortsighted .
This does deliver quite a lot for Leavers . Boles and co though need to stress how the UK could add some restrictions on freedom of movement .
Don’t get me wrong if a second vote happened I would be very happy but at this point it’s hard to see that .
Have the EU signalled they would agree to compromise on their four freedoms? Seems to be a bit of a shot in the dark.
They wouldn't compromise on the 'four freedoms'. We'd be subject to the full freedom of movement directive, plus obviously conforming to EU regulations on goods and services etc, adhering to the state subsidy rules, paying a fat fee (although probably less than as a full member), and probably EU environmental law and the social chapter. It really would not be very much different from full EU membership except we'd be out of the political structures, have no say (other than the right to lobby, like Norway) in regulations, and probably be out of the CAP and CFP (although the latter could be contentious).
It seems a daft idea to me - we might as well remain full members if we're going to accept all that lot - but if those who voted Leave can be conned into acquiescing in it, I suppose it has merit as a face-saving option, certainly compared with the full-on disaster of crashing out.
Edit: Corrected missing 'not' from 'It really would not be very much different..'
The bit I don't understand about it is that it would only be part of the PD which is in no way legally binding. As such it would only take a harder (than CM2) Brexit leader of the Tory party who is half way electable to take over from May and we could see the whole thing ignored by the British in the next phase. If I were a Soft Brexit/Remain supporter I would be very dubious about supporting this as a mean as of getting a softer Brexit.
I experienced the same bafflement over this radged scheme. All they would really be voting for is May's fucking shit deal.
Because it relies on opposition votes to get through - and now apparently has the tacit approval of the DUP - if passed, any resiling from it would mean a general election... which realistically is the means by which any post Brexit future will be settled, in any event.
It is no more legally binding than the referendum vote - but perhaps equally effective politically ?
Comments
Win - for its proponents (obviously).
Win - for sense & sensibility, the most coherent deliverable non-hard brexit.
Win - for Labour, no Tory PM can pursue it therefore the political crisis deepens.
Win - for May, faced with this as the alternative her deal goes through at MV4 or 5.
I wouldn't rule out Sinn Fein turning up for the LOLZ. It's certainly not the most batshit insane thing that's happened so far this year.
https://order-order.com/2019/04/01/labour-pcc-wrote-fkin-ethiopian-jew-look-like-ethiopian-jew/
British sites enjoy lower cost levels than do sites in France and Germany, Enders said. “Our unions do not like to hear this, but it’s the reality,” he told reporters in Munich. Among other things, Airbus builds the wings for all of its commercial aircraft in the UK. “Our British colleagues are very productive.”
https://aviationweek.com/commercial-aviation/enders-airbus-uk-factories-could-remain-competitive-post-brexit
And so should the Tories and other parties!
Edit Was 1-14, hat tip to @AndyJS for a great money buying opportunity close to the election
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2017/04/21/gloomy-local-by-election-news-for-lab-in-the-week-a-general-election-was-called/
I entirely agree that we might as well remain as full members. But as we’ve seen, there is not even close to a majority in Parliament for revoking. That is not an argument against a consensus least worst option.
Agreed. CM 2.0 is a fair compromise. They should certainly vote for it.
/Another mis-spent yoof here/
Like you, Richard, I am minded to analyse situations through the prism of the players' incentives. As the EU have a huge incentive to validate CM 2.0, it wouldn't pose a difficult journey.
You really should get a life
Story after story falls apart when you remove the spin
Corbyn Commie Spy for example
True CM 2.0 has a de facto CU with the backstop, but that is THE CU not A CU (Which is fine)
*innocent face*
It will come as no surprise that the low-life Trumpton cheats at golf.
Which I said at the time was horeshit, because those hired to spy arent total morons.
Then a new Tory leader and a GE to decide the target Future Relationship for phase 2 and who will be running with it. The Labour and Tory manifesto for that election will trump whatever is in the PD.
This is what we are looking at, I think, unless Labour are sufficiently disciplined to block everything in the hope of forcing a long extension and/or triggering a snap crisis GE pre leaving.
SO exciting!
Ring or text ERG members and get them to vote for Brexit i.e. May's deal.
All the stuff about May ignoring parliament has been based on votes
If it’s the law then it’s the law.
https://www.politico.eu/article/juncker-calls-david-cameron-one-of-the-great-destroyers-of-modern-times/
Common Market 2.0 is definitely superior to CU anyway I think !
So maybe it is.
"...yet such hath been the wicked policies of those who from time to time have endeavoured to bring this Nation into bondage; that they have in all times either by the disuse or abuse of Parliaments deprived the people of their hopes..."
If that is true, common market 2 is an attempt to pull the wool over people's eyes
Have we had any more meaningless votes?
He said he didn’t realise it was “quite as significant” as it was.
That’s a relative statement rather than the absolute one you report
A white-gold wielder.....
(Convince Remainers he’s in their side while at the same time undermining their cause in favour of no deal)
So far, we haven't even got an expressed will – so this would mark serious progress.
P.S. I think it will lose narrowly. Hope I am wrong.
Interesting they now support Brexit
"I am the Punishment of God. If you had not committed such sins, He would not have sent such a punishment as I."
OK, so the stated aim at that point could be a very closely aligned trade deal but this is not binding. Given that the Tories are about to change leader, the risk is that the new PM (perhaps following a general election which they win) would pursue maximum divergence and would, if necessary, walk away from the WA.
Oddly, the best chance of PV happening is the entrance into number 10 of the person the PV crowd seem to hate so much - Jeremy Corbyn.
(Or remain.)
https://twitter.com/nickeardleybbc/status/1112709271878283265
I support a 2nd referendum, but MPs who use that to oppose reasonable compromise are exhausting my patience (and that includes the whole independent group, a couple of whom I count as personal friends).
Juncker is showing his pettiness though, whatever the awfulness or not of leaving the EU that's a ridiculous thing to suggest.
If something like CM2 passes, but opposition in the Conservative Party is so intense that the government can't accept it, then I think the government has no choice but to go into Opposition.
Labour whipping in favour instead of mildly encouraging. Last time they had about 42 against and about 60 abstentions on it - that could be enough to get it over the line. If 10-20 of the 42 switch, the gap goes down to 20-40; if 40 of the abstentions go aye instead, it's over the line.
By the way, there was quite a strong contingent of Conservatives for a Peoples' Vote on the march in London.
Mays deal vs carry on negotiating
That would allow trade deals , out of the ECJ , fisheries and agriculture come into UK control.
That’s an easier sell .
However now that Labour are going to whip for Common Market 2.0 and with SNP support it’s likely to get at least towards the 250 mark .
It is no more legally binding than the referendum vote - but perhaps equally effective politically ?