So I am doing some work in June in NY for a French bank and they are offering me a choice of flights with Delta or Air France. What do I do? Are Air France really that bad? Or is there a cheaper choice I could offer them? I know nothing about Delta - all I really care about is not crashing and having enough space to stretch my legs as I have had DVT twice and am at high risk of it.
Also if any PB’er is in NY in June and fancies a drink feel free to VM me.
So I am doing some work in June in NY for a French bank and they are offering me a choice of flights with Delta or Air France. What do I do? Are Air France really that bad? Or is there a cheaper choice I could offer them? I know nothing about Delta - all I really care about is not crashing and having enough space to stretch my legs as I have had DVT twice and am at high risk of it.
Also if any PB’er is in NY in June and fancies a drink feel free to VM me.
Interesting fact on BBC News - apparently the Tories don't have enough £ to fight a GE. Have those donations to the 'party of business' dried up? Who'd a thunk it?
Plenty of rich Conservative MPs.
Can't the likes of Mogg donate the odd million ?
Don't be silly. Mogg give money? To somebody else?
Interesting fact on BBC News - apparently the Tories don't have enough £ to fight a GE. Have those donations to the 'party of business' dried up? Who'd a thunk it?
I call total horseshit on that. The last official figures had Tories still getting more cash than the other parties, it is supposedly the next set where it will show a drop off.
However, if a GE is called, people will stump up the cash (just like the unions will for Labour).
I think what would be far worse for the Tories is I don't think they are organized. When they did well in 2010 / 2015, they sent a lot of time organizing, polling, focus groups etc. They had tested their messages and a good idea who to target.
2017 showed the opposite, not a f##king clue.
I agree with every point of that FU. It smelt to me too. And if there is an election, it will be a very strange one, maybe with a very strange result. Will opposition get the the blame for how country is feeling right now?
Interesting fact on BBC News - apparently the Tories don't have enough £ to fight a GE. Have those donations to the 'party of business' dried up? Who'd a thunk it?
I call total horseshit on that. The last official figures had Tories still getting more cash than the other parties, it is supposedly the next set where it will show a drop off.
However, if a GE is called, people will stump up the cash (just like the unions will for Labour).
I think what would be far worse for the Tories is I don't think they are organized. When they did well in 2010 / 2015, they sent a lot of time organizing, polling, focus groups etc. They had tested their messages and a good idea who to target.
2017 showed the opposite, not a f##king clue.
2019, not a f##cking clue, no f##cking ground troops.
If MPs can’t find a resolution by Wednesday then they need to support Mays deal.
I berated the Peoples Vote earlier and was right to do so . As a Remainer Common Market 2.0 was a compromise . Sadly as I feared some MPs are willing to play high risk poker , all or nothing .
A Peoples Vote can be added to the WAIB , it doesn’t need to be voted through now . The TIG are behaving very poorly , together with some Labour who voted against CM 2.0.
Interesting fact on BBC News - apparently the Tories don't have enough £ to fight a GE. Have those donations to the 'party of business' dried up? Who'd a thunk it?
I call total horseshit on that. The last official figures had Tories still getting more cash than the other parties, it is supposedly the next set where it will show a drop off.
However, if a GE is called, people will stump up the cash (just like the unions will for Labour).
I think what would be far worse for the Tories is I don't think they are organized. When they did well in 2010 / 2015, they sent a lot of time organizing, polling, focus groups etc. They had tested their messages and a good idea who to target.
2017 showed the opposite, not a f##king clue.
2019, not a f##cking clue, no f##cking ground troops.
They will have no ground game unless the associations are on side. Guess what they need to do for that?
Interesting fact on BBC News - apparently the Tories don't have enough £ to fight a GE. Have those donations to the 'party of business' dried up? Who'd a thunk it?
I call total horseshit on that. The last official figures had Tories still getting more cash than the other parties, it is supposedly the next set where it will show a drop off.
However, if a GE is called, people will stump up the cash (just like the unions will for Labour).
I think what would be far worse for the Tories is I don't think they are organized. When they did well in 2010 / 2015, they sent a lot of time organizing, polling, focus groups etc. They had tested their messages and a good idea who to target.
2017 showed the opposite, not a f##king clue.
2019, not a f##cking clue, no f##cking ground troops.
They will have no ground game unless the associations are on side. Guess what they need to do for that?
If MPs can’t find a resolution by Wednesday then they need to support Mays deal.
I berated the Peoples Vote earlier and was right to do so . As a Remainer Common Market 2.0 was a compromise . Sadly as I feared some MPs are willing to play high risk poker , all or nothing .
A Peoples Vote can be added to the WAIB , it doesn’t need to be voted through now . The TIG are behaving very poorly , together with some Labour who voted against CM 2.0.
People's vote reaction to this shitshow was "Parliament can't decide, let's put it to the people".
Didn't mention that PV failed to get a majority ffsake >.>
'Mr Juncker, 64, told the Saarland regional parliament in Germany that Mr Cameron had banned him and the commission from taking part in the campaign, meaning that British voters had been deprived of the truth about the EU. “We were forbidden from being present in any way in the referendum campaign by Mr Cameron, who is one of the great destroyers of the modern era,” Mr Juncker said. “Because he said the commission is even less popular in the UK'
So I am doing some work in June in NY for a French bank and they are offering me a choice of flights with Delta or Air France. What do I do? Are Air France really that bad? Or is there a cheaper choice I could offer them? I know nothing about Delta - all I really care about is not crashing and having enough space to stretch my legs as I have had DVT twice and am at high risk of it.
Delta flights you can credit to Virgin frequent flyer scheme. I’ve never flown with them though. It’s even possible you may end up on a Virgin metal codeshare.
AF, having flown with them, I wouldn’t touch with a barge pole. Also I don’t trust their pilots to be able to fly a plane.
(By June you may actually be able to credit AF flights to Virgin FF too)
Surely the one thing everyone can agree on is trying to come up with a solution for something so important in just 11 days can't be the right thing to do. Everyone needs more time to come to a reasoned solution. This situation is the equivalent of an A-level student trying to do all their revision the night before the exam, having been too lazy to do so beforehand.
Actually EEA/EFTA is acceptable to Scots, No Deal is not and most polls show the latter gives a majority for independence
But the point is that if rUK will be in the EEA, the SNP can present independence purely as an upgrade to full EU membership without losing and trade access.
Surely the one thing everyone can agree on is trying to come up with a solution for something so important in just 11 days can't be the right thing to do. Everyone needs more time to come to a reasoned solution. This situation is the equivalent of an A-level student trying to do all their revision the night before the exam, having been too lazy to do so beforehand.
Brings to mind an "Essay Crisis" style of working. Now where have I heard that phrase before?
The only way that a Conservative MP could vote against their party in a vote of confidence tabled by Labour would be in the knowledge that if they would lose the Tory whip and be standing as a TIG or independent against a Conservative candidate in a few weeks time, should the VONC lead to an immediate general election. It is hard to see more than literally a handful choosing to join Boles and the Conservative TIGs in being prepared to take the nuclear option. Not quite enough to force a VONC over the line although it would be close.
Furthermore, if May tried to force an early dissolution in the unlikely event that the Cabinet agreed she would have to convince 2/3rds of the Commons to back it. A resolution could get 433 in favour with 0 against and 217 no shows and still fail.
Apparently Stephen Hepburn, Labour MP for Jarrow, has voted against everything in every vote that has taken place so far, including all of the meaningful votes and the indicative votes. What exactly is he in favour of?
'Mr Juncker, 64, told the Saarland regional parliament in Germany that Mr Cameron had banned him and the commission from taking part in the campaign, meaning that British voters had been deprived of the truth about the EU. “We were forbidden from being present in any way in the referendum campaign by Mr Cameron, who is one of the great destroyers of the modern era,” Mr Juncker said. “Because he said the commission is even less popular in the UK'
So I am doing some work in June in NY for a French bank and they are offering me a choice of flights with Delta or Air France. What do I do? Are Air France really that bad? Or is there a cheaper choice I could offer them? I know nothing about Delta - all I really care about is not crashing and having enough space to stretch my legs as I have had DVT twice and am at high risk of it.
Delta flights you can credit to Virgin frequent flyer scheme. I’ve never flown with them though. It’s even possible you may end up on a Virgin metal codeshare.
AF, having flown with them, I wouldn’t touch with a barge pole. Also I don’t trust their pilots to be able to fly a plane.
(By June you may actually be able to credit AF flights to Virgin FF too)
Thanks. Helpfully they have given me prices so I will see if I can get something else. It’s a bit difficult to tell a French bank that I don’t want to fly on their national airline because they keep crashing their planes into the Atlantic.......
I have some airmiles with BA so I may use these up. What about Norwegian airlines? Any good?
The only way that a Conservative MP could vote against their party in a vote of confidence tabled by Labour would be in the knowledge that if they would lose the Tory whip and be standing as a TIG or independent against a Conservative candidate in a few weeks time, should the VONC lead to an immediate general election. It is hard to see more than literally a handful choosing to join Boles and the Conservative TIGs in being prepared to take the nuclear option. Not quite enough to force a VONC over the line although it would be close.
Furthermore, if May tried to force an early dissolution in the unlikely event that the Cabinet agreed she would have to convince 2/3rds of the Commons to back it. A resolution could get 433 in favour with 0 against and 217 no shows and still fail.
It still seems a fairly high bar.
The Fixed Term act was a stupid idea IMO, and it should have been every 4 years not 5 years. In fact the LDs were in favour of 4 years but the Tories said they wouldn't agree to it unless it was 5.
There is only one way out of this mess and that is for Labour to back the deal on the table and ensure any attempt to collapse the gov't by vengeful DUP/ERG ultras before 22 May is voted down. After 22 May the gloves can be off as far as a VONC is concerned and a GE can be forced.
So I am doing some work in June in NY for a French bank and they are offering me a choice of flights with Delta or Air France. What do I do? Are Air France really that bad? Or is there a cheaper choice I could offer them? I know nothing about Delta - all I really care about is not crashing and having enough space to stretch my legs as I have had DVT twice and am at high risk of it.
Delta flights you can credit to Virgin frequent flyer scheme. I’ve never flown with them though. It’s even possible you may end up on a Virgin metal codeshare.
AF, having flown with them, I wouldn’t touch with a barge pole. Also I don’t trust their pilots to be able to fly a plane.
(By June you may actually be able to credit AF flights to Virgin FF too)
Thanks. Helpfully they have given me prices so I will see if I can get something else. It’s a bit difficult to tell a French bank that I don’t want to fly on their national airline because they keep crashing their planes into the Atlantic.......
I have some airmiles with BA so I may use these up. What about Norwegian airlines? Any good?
Norwegian is the EasyJet of Trans-Atlantic flights. You have to pay for everything as an extra, luggage, food, drink etc.
Never flown with them, but I believe the planes are new and decent, but unless you get a super super cheap price, all those extras soon add up to the cost of a regular airline ticket price.
If MPs can’t find a resolution by Wednesday then they need to support Mays deal.
I berated the Peoples Vote earlier and was right to do so . As a Remainer Common Market 2.0 was a compromise . Sadly as I feared some MPs are willing to play high risk poker , all or nothing .
A Peoples Vote can be added to the WAIB , it doesn’t need to be voted through now . The TIG are behaving very poorly , together with some Labour who voted against CM 2.0.
People's vote reaction to this shitshow was "Parliament can't decide, let's put it to the people".
Didn't mention that PV failed to get a majority ffsake >.>
I’m getting seriously pissed off now because there are entrenched opinions in the Commons which refuse to move . I understand it’s been just two days of votes and this should have happened 2 years ago but looking at how MPs voted it’s clear some refuse to accept a compromise .
The EU looking on are in dismay , I fear the UK will be left with revoke or no deal .
I hate the idea of revoke and and despise no deal . MPs have to find a solution by Wednesday and if they can’t they must support Mays deal.
Surely the one thing everyone can agree on is trying to come up with a solution for something so important in just 11 days can't be the right thing to do. Everyone needs more time to come to a reasoned solution. This situation is the equivalent of an A-level student trying to do all their revision the night before the exam, having been too lazy to do so beforehand.
To stretch your analogy further, you might be given more time to revise for the exam at a later date if you had a good reason for such a delay - such as a major illness - but not simply because you now realise you earlier made a mistake by not revising.
The EU will want a credible plan from us that will promise a resolution of the crisis before agreeing to an extension. I'm not sure that wanting more time because we've realised that we wasted the last two years will be good enough.
If anything, the longer this goes on the more divided and unreasonable the Commons appears to become.
So I am doing some work in June in NY for a French bank and they are offering me a choice of flights with Delta or Air France. What do I do? Are Air France really that bad? Or is there a cheaper choice I could offer them? I know nothing about Delta - all I really care about is not crashing and having enough space to stretch my legs as I have had DVT twice and am at high risk of it.
Delta flights you can credit to Virgin frequent flyer scheme. I’ve never flown with them though. It’s even possible you may end up on a Virgin metal codeshare.
AF, having flown with them, I wouldn’t touch with a barge pole. Also I don’t trust their pilots to be able to fly a plane.
(By June you may actually be able to credit AF flights to Virgin FF too)
Thanks. Helpfully they have given me prices so I will see if I can get something else. It’s a bit difficult to tell a French bank that I don’t want to fly on their national airline because they keep crashing their planes into the Atlantic.......
I have some airmiles with BA so I may use these up. What about Norwegian airlines? Any good?
Norwegian is the EasyJet of Trans-Atlantic flights. You have to pay for everything as an extra, luggage, food, drink etc.
Never flown with them, but I believe the planes are new and decent, but unless you get a super super cheap price, all those extras soon add up to the cost of a regular airline ticket price.
So I am doing some work in June in NY for a French bank and they are offering me a choice of flights with Delta or Air France. What do I do? Are Air France really that bad? Or is there a cheaper choice I could offer them? I know nothing about Delta - all I really care about is not crashing and having enough space to stretch my legs as I have had DVT twice and am at high risk of it.
Delta flights you can credit to Virgin frequent flyer scheme. I’ve never flown with them though. It’s even possible you may end up on a Virgin metal codeshare.
AF, having flown with them, I wouldn’t touch with a barge pole. Also I don’t trust their pilots to be able to fly a plane.
(By June you may actually be able to credit AF flights to Virgin FF too)
Thanks. Helpfully they have given me prices so I will see if I can get something else. It’s a bit difficult to tell a French bank that I don’t want to fly on their national airline because they keep crashing their planes into the Atlantic.......
I have some airmiles with BA so I may use these up. What about Norwegian airlines? Any good?
Norwegian is the EasyJet of Trans-Atlantic flights. You have to pay for everything as an extra, luggage, food, drink etc.
Never flown with them, but I believe the planes are new and decent, but unless you get a super super cheap price, all those extras soon add up to the cost of a regular airline ticket price.
At this point the EU is probably more worried by the prospect of Britain revoking and staying in than No Deal. If she tries to threaten them with No Deal they will just ask us to shut the door on our way out.
People go back and forth on this, quite inconsistently. Some thing the EU are very keen for us to remain, others think they are just sick of us and want us gone. Both cannot be right. Though the one thing we know does have a majority if they do want us gone is sort out the backstop, unfortunately that's a red line for them.
They want us to be gone, but can't afford for us to do so lest they lose our contribution. Therefore they need us to remain.
That's the great thing about Common Market 2.0 - we would be outside the EU in name only, have little or no say in the rules we were subject to and like Norway would still be paying shedloads to the EU like Norway.
Of course the Cabinet all abstained from the indicative votes - would any of the results have been different had they been given a free vote?
A second referendum, with remain as an option, is the only truly democratic way forward.
And Revoke as the other option, presumably ?
I really don't fucking care, I'm also quite happy with any deliverable and reasonable form of brexit. But as it has been demonstrated beyond all possible doubt that ineptitude, incompetence and stupidity inform everything any leaver ever says or does yes, remain options look the safest bet at the moment.
Surely if you voted leave you must have begun to entertain the possibility that doing so was the act of a complete and utter tosser?
Apparently Stephen Hepburn, Labour MP for Jarrow, has voted against everything in every vote that has taken place so far, including all of the meaningful votes and the indicative votes. What exactly is he in favour of?
Surely the one thing everyone can agree on is trying to come up with a solution for something so important in just 11 days can't be the right thing to do. Everyone needs more time to come to a reasoned solution. This situation is the equivalent of an A-level student trying to do all their revision the night before the exam, having been too lazy to do so beforehand.
Absolutely. Rather than rush things, I suggest parliament does nothing more and lets existing legislation take its course, so that we can leave in 11 days time and then recommence renegotiations at leisure without our hands being tied. I would expect a long term agreement to be in place within months, with the EU having every incentive to protect their trading surplus and with the likes of Varadkar having eat humble pie. Under May's deal, which in fact settles very little, we leave and then recommence negotiations from a position of duress, and can look forward to continued uncertainty until the backstop eventually kicks in.
So I am doing some work in June in NY for a French bank and they are offering me a choice of flights with Delta or Air France. What do I do? Are Air France really that bad? Or is there a cheaper choice I could offer them? I know nothing about Delta - all I really care about is not crashing and having enough space to stretch my legs as I have had DVT twice and am at high risk of it.
Delta flights you can credit to Virgin frequent flyer scheme. I’ve never flown with them though. It’s even possible you may end up on a Virgin metal codeshare.
AF, having flown with them, I wouldn’t touch with a barge pole. Also I don’t trust their pilots to be able to fly a plane.
(By June you may actually be able to credit AF flights to Virgin FF too)
Thanks. Helpfully they have given me prices so I will see if I can get something else. It’s a bit difficult to tell a French bank that I don’t want to fly on their national airline because they keep crashing their planes into the Atlantic.......
I have some airmiles with BA so I may use these up. What about Norwegian airlines? Any good?
My sister recently flew Norwegian to the US , but in Premium. And she had no complaints. They managed not to go bust at least, which she was worried about.
I’m not a mega-flyer myself really but when I do fly I do meticulous research on airline, plane type etc. My preference is anything I can credit to BA (so OneWorld airlines). And obviously BA direct would be preferable to having to change planes in Paris, with either a tight connection or a long connection. Although BA often uses some quite knackered planes transatlantic.
Apparently Stephen Hepburn, Labour MP for Jarrow, has voted against everything in every vote that has taken place so far, including all of the meaningful votes and the indicative votes. What exactly is he in favour of?
Surely the one thing everyone can agree on is trying to come up with a solution for something so important in just 11 days can't be the right thing to do. Everyone needs more time to come to a reasoned solution. This situation is the equivalent of an A-level student trying to do all their revision the night before the exam, having been too lazy to do so beforehand.
Absolutely. Rather than rush things, I suggest parliament does nothing more and lets existing legislation take its course, so that we can leave in 11 days time and then recommence renegotiations at leisure without our hands being tied. I would expect a long term agreement to be in place within months, with the EU having every incentive to protect their trading surplus and with the likes of Varadkar having eat humble pie. Under May's deal, which in fact settles very little, we leave and then recommence negotiations from a position of duress, and can look forward to continued uncertainty until the backstop eventually kicks in.
At this point the EU is probably more worried by the prospect of Britain revoking and staying in than No Deal. If she tries to threaten them with No Deal they will just ask us to shut the door on our way out.
People go back and forth on this, quite inconsistently. Some thing the EU are very keen for us to remain, others think they are just sick of us and want us gone. Both cannot be right. Though the one thing we know does have a majority if they do want us gone is sort out the backstop, unfortunately that's a red line for them.
They want us to be gone, but can't afford for us to do so lest they lose our contribution. Therefore they need us to remain.
That's the great thing about Common Market 2.0 - we would be outside the EU in name only, have little or no say in the rules we were subject to and like Norway would still be paying shedloads to the EU like Norway.
Of course the Cabinet all abstained from the indicative votes - would any of the results have been different had they been given a free vote?
I think the accepted wisdom is that cabinet votes would have added a further net 12 to the Noes on each of those four, probably a lot more on Cherry. So bigger losses.
Actually EEA/EFTA is acceptable to Scots, No Deal is not and most polls show the latter gives a majority for independence
But the point is that if rUK will be in the EEA, the SNP can present independence purely as an upgrade to full EU membership without losing and trade access.
The SNP will try and twist anything their way but most polls show Yes only gets a majority with No Deal
Apparently Sir Mark Sedwill the top civil servant and Mays national security adviser has written to the Cabinet regarding no deal .
Some very stark warnings especially on national security . Not a good look for the no deal nutjobs in the cabinet to play around with national security .
Apparently Stephen Hepburn, Labour MP for Jarrow, has voted against everything in every vote that has taken place so far, including all of the meaningful votes and the indicative votes. What exactly is he in favour of?
He's waiting for his unicorn to arrive...
I suspect that has already been slaughtered and is being sold for use in a batch of Iceland frozen lasagne
Actually EEA/EFTA is acceptable to Scots, No Deal is not and most polls show the latter gives a majority for independence
But the point is that if rUK will be in the EEA, the SNP can present independence purely as an upgrade to full EU membership without losing and trade access.
The SNP will try and twist anything their way but most polls show Yes only gets a majority with No Deal
May's argument is based on substance, not polling.
What do we think happens if you combine the CU with the 2nd Ref? You can add on the missing TIGs and LDs to the CU, but how many of the current CU votes do you lose at the other end?
Apparently Stephen Hepburn, Labour MP for Jarrow, has voted against everything in every vote that has taken place so far, including all of the meaningful votes and the indicative votes. What exactly is he in favour of?
No Deal.
On the other hand, Dennis Skinner actually voted for two of the options this time.
What do we think happens if you combine the CU with the 2nd Ref? You can add on the missing TIGs and LDs to the CU, but how many of the current CU votes do you lose at the other end?
I don't think a second referendum works on those terms because there's no convincing counter-argument when the likes of Farage say you're not offering a proper Brexit. A May's deal versus Remain referendum works because although May's deal is a compromise with reality, and the political declaration involves smoke and mirrors, it can at least be defended as being consistent with the broad thrust of the 2016 Vote Leave platform.
Apparently Stephen Hepburn, Labour MP for Jarrow, has voted against everything in every vote that has taken place so far, including all of the meaningful votes and the indicative votes. What exactly is he in favour of?
He's waiting for his unicorn to arrive...
A Labour 'jobs first' Brexit - i.e. a Brexit which creates more jobs for Labour MPs?
Actually EEA/EFTA is acceptable to Scots, No Deal is not and most polls show the latter gives a majority for independence
But the point is that if rUK will be in the EEA, the SNP can present independence purely as an upgrade to full EU membership without losing and trade access.
The SNP will try and twist anything their way but most polls show Yes only gets a majority with No Deal
May's argument is based on substance, not polling.
Yes, because that has worked so well for her so far
What do we think happens if you combine the CU with the 2nd Ref? You can add on the missing TIGs and LDs to the CU, but how many of the current CU votes do you lose at the other end?
I don't think a second referendum works on those terms because there's no convincing counter-argument when the likes of Farage say you're not offering a proper Brexit. A May's deal versus Remain referendum works because although May's deal is a compromise with reality, and the political declaration involves smoke and mirrors, it can at least be defended as being consistent with the broad thrust of the 2016 Vote Leave platform.
It doesn't matter what we think, it matters what MPs would vote for.
However, I don't think there's really a difference there because the likes of Farage also say TMay's deal isn't a proper Brexit, and the constituency who will disagree with that but say he's right on the CU is about 4 people.
What do we think happens if you combine the CU with the 2nd Ref? You can add on the missing TIGs and LDs to the CU, but how many of the current CU votes do you lose at the other end?
Apparently Stephen Hepburn, Labour MP for Jarrow, has voted against everything in every vote that has taken place so far, including all of the meaningful votes and the indicative votes. What exactly is he in favour of?
No Deal.
On the other hand, Dennis Skinner actually voted for two of the options this time.
Apparently Stephen Hepburn, Labour MP for Jarrow, has voted against everything in every vote that has taken place so far, including all of the meaningful votes and the indicative votes. What exactly is he in favour of?
No Deal.
On the other hand, Dennis Skinner actually voted for two of the options this time.
So I am doing some work in June in NY for a French bank and they are offering me a choice of flights with Delta or Air France. What do I do? Are Air France really that bad? Or is there a cheaper choice I could offer them? I know nothing about Delta - all I really care about is not crashing and having enough space to stretch my legs as I have had DVT twice and am at high risk of it.
Depending on route Air France have the A380 - best plane in the air, Delta don't. Edit - Delta run the 330 LHR>JFK, Air France the 380, depending on the flight.
Delta also code-shares with Virgin, so it might be possible to get a Delta ticket on a Virgin flight.
What do we think happens if you combine the CU with the 2nd Ref? You can add on the missing TIGs and LDs to the CU, but how many of the current CU votes do you lose at the other end?
I don't think a second referendum works on those terms because there's no convincing counter-argument when the likes of Farage say you're not offering a proper Brexit. A May's deal versus Remain referendum works because although May's deal is a compromise with reality, and the political declaration involves smoke and mirrors, it can at least be defended as being consistent with the broad thrust of the 2016 Vote Leave platform.
It doesn't matter what we think, it matters what MPs would vote for.
However, I don't think there's really a difference there because the likes of Farage also say TMay's deal isn't a proper Brexit, and the constituency who will disagree with that but say he's right on the CU is about 4 people.
Except that if they vote through Kyle-Wilson, then at some point the Commons has to confront the fact that a confirmatory referendum isn't a "People's Vote", doesn't have Remain on the ballot paper, and results in us being right back where we started if we vote No. The sole point of KW is for Labour to pretend they're in favour of Ref2; if it starts to look like it'll pass, they'll have to pull support somehow. I'm not convinced that isn't what happened to their own Brexit plan over the weekend, and it's just about conceivable they moved away from CU towards CM today just to ensure that both failed.
I would assume the ERG are on top of the world tonight as the legislation to stop no deal and approve our participation in the EU elections will not receive royal assent by a week on friday
TM attending the EU brexit crisis meeting on the 10th April will have the EU in a spin and the Irish Border will become the EU and Varadkar's worst nightmare, as they either put up a border or agree to no borders as predicted by the ERG and DUP
I would expect some form of transistion to no deal
It is more than possible, but equally HMG could have fallen in the meantime
I think you're right and if that happens the ERG and DUP should be lauded as heroes.
It is a win/win scenario.
The EU puts up a border and Varadkar will be slaughtered for screwing this up and they'll want a deal to get the border back down and goodbye backstop.
Or more likely as the ERG/DUP have said all along they don't put up a border, the bluff is called. Talks can begin to get a deal without the backstop.
Either way talks can begin on equals having stood up and refused to kowtow.
You are quite insane, aren’t you?
QTWAIN.
Holding a different opinion doesn't make you insane.
What do we think happens if you combine the CU with the 2nd Ref? You can add on the missing TIGs and LDs to the CU, but how many of the current CU votes do you lose at the other end?
I don't think a second referendum works on those terms because there's no convincing counter-argument when the likes of Farage say you're not offering a proper Brexit. A May's deal versus Remain referendum works because although May's deal is a compromise with reality, and the political declaration involves smoke and mirrors, it can at least be defended as being consistent with the broad thrust of the 2016 Vote Leave platform.
It doesn't matter what we think, it matters what MPs would vote for.
However, I don't think there's really a difference there because the likes of Farage also say TMay's deal isn't a proper Brexit, and the constituency who will disagree with that but say he's right on the CU is about 4 people.
Except that if they vote through Kyle-Wilson, then at some point the Commons has to confront the fact that a confirmatory referendum isn't a "People's Vote", doesn't have Remain on the ballot paper, and results in us being right back where we started if we vote No. The sole point of KW is for Labour to pretend they're in favour of Ref2; if it starts to look like it'll pass, they'll have to pull support somehow. I'm not convinced that isn't what happened to their own Brexit plan over the weekend, and it's just about conceivable they moved away from CU towards CM today just to ensure that both failed.
I believe Kyle Wilson detail is that if the Deal is voted down the default would be Remain
Commons won't allow itIts not up to the Commons - its up to the government and 27 other governments - and it only needs one.
Including our own.
As I said last time if the PM wants to get a veto its very easy to get one while honouring the Common's request to the letter. Just tell the truth.
Mr Tusk,
The UK is unable to sign the deal we have agreed. The Commons is unable to agree any plan that we can agree on. We require a longer extension in order to find a solution. The only solution the Commons has been able to agree is to renegotiate the agreement to drop the backstop.
Commons won't allow itIts not up to the Commons - its up to the government and 27 other governments - and it only needs one.
Including our own.
As I said last time if the PM wants to get a veto its very easy to get one while honouring the Common's request to the letter. Just tell the truth.
Mr Tusk,
The UK is unable to sign the deal we have agreed. The Commons is unable to agree any plan that we can agree on. We require a longer extension in order to find a solution. The only solution the Commons has been able to agree is to renegotiate the agreement to drop the backstop.
Sincerely, Theresa May
And tell them Arlene Foster will now be leading the negotiations for the UK government. That might scare them...
Commons won't allow itIts not up to the Commons - its up to the government and 27 other governments - and it only needs one.
Including our own.
As I said last time if the PM wants to get a veto its very easy to get one while honouring the Common's request to the letter. Just tell the truth.
Mr Tusk,
The UK is unable to sign the deal we have agreed. The Commons is unable to agree any plan that we can agree on. We require a longer extension in order to find a solution. The only solution the Commons has been able to agree is to renegotiate the agreement to drop the backstop.
Sincerely, Theresa May
Dear Theresa
Sod Off and enjoy No Deal, we are keeping a seat warm for Scotland
What do we think happens if you combine the CU with the 2nd Ref? You can add on the missing TIGs and LDs to the CU, but how many of the current CU votes do you lose at the other end?
I don't think a second referendum works on those terms because there's no convincing counter-argument when the likes of Farage say you're not offering a proper Brexit. A May's deal versus Remain referendum works because although May's deal is a compromise with reality, and the political declaration involves smoke and mirrors, it can at least be defended as being consistent with the broad thrust of the 2016 Vote Leave platform.
It doesn't matter what we think, it matters what MPs would vote for.
However, I don't think there's really a difference there because the likes of Farage also say TMay's deal isn't a proper Brexit, and the constituency who will disagree with that but say he's right on the CU is about 4 people.
Except that if they vote through Kyle-Wilson, then at some point the Commons has to confront the fact that a confirmatory referendum isn't a "People's Vote", doesn't have Remain on the ballot paper, and results in us being right back where we started if we vote No. The sole point of KW is for Labour to pretend they're in favour of Ref2; if it starts to look like it'll pass, they'll have to pull support somehow. I'm not convinced that isn't what happened to their own Brexit plan over the weekend, and it's just about conceivable they moved away from CU towards CM today just to ensure that both failed.
I believe Kyle Wilson detail is that if the Deal is voted down the default would be Remain
Sure, that's what they want people (or perhaps People) to think. It's a clever subterfuge, entirely reliant on People not understanding what English words mean (specifically the word "confirmatory").
If the only way to keep Scotland in the union is by divergence from the EU then the argument is already lost ffs.
It is also a rubbish argument, if Brexiteers are prepared to go to No Deal with their biggest trading partner to get full independence from the EU why shouldn't Nats be prepared to go to No Deal with their biggest trading partner to get full independence from the UK
Apparently Sir Mark Sedwill the top civil servant and Mays national security adviser has written to the Cabinet regarding no deal .
Some very stark warnings especially on national security . Not a good look for the no deal nutjobs in the cabinet to play around with national security .
We only have national security if we stay in the EU? Not good for non EU countries in this world then, nor us till ‘73.
What do we think happens if you combine the CU with the 2nd Ref? You can add on the missing TIGs and LDs to the CU, but how many of the current CU votes do you lose at the other end?
I don't think a second referendum works on those terms because there's no convincing counter-argument when the likes of Farage say you're not offering a proper Brexit. A May's deal versus Remain referendum works because although May's deal is a compromise with reality, and the political declaration involves smoke and mirrors, it can at least be defended as being consistent with the broad thrust of the 2016 Vote Leave platform.
It doesn't matter what we think, it matters what MPs would vote for.
However, I don't think there's really a difference there because the likes of Farage also say TMay's deal isn't a proper Brexit, and the constituency who will disagree with that but say he's right on the CU is about 4 people.
Except that if they vote through Kyle-Wilson, then at some point the Commons has to confront the fact that a confirmatory referendum isn't a "People's Vote", doesn't have Remain on the ballot paper, and results in us being right back where we started if we vote No. The sole point of KW is for Labour to pretend they're in favour of Ref2; if it starts to look like it'll pass, they'll have to pull support somehow. I'm not convinced that isn't what happened to their own Brexit plan over the weekend, and it's just about conceivable they moved away from CU towards CM today just to ensure that both failed.
I believe Kyle Wilson detail is that if the Deal is voted down the default would be Remain
Sure, that's what they want people (or perhaps People) to think. It's a clever subterfuge, entirely reliant on People not understanding what English words mean (specifically the word "confirmatory").
If it won the indicative vote once the actual referendum legislation was drawn up they would make clear the default was Remain
Rather than a waste of time conclusion of no no no no, I actually think we have a much clearer picture.
We aren’t dealing with two sides in this like the referendum of 2016. There are numerous incompatible death cults standing firm on what they see as positions of principle, whilst others see them as stupid, obstinate and evil. Worse, there’s increasing bitterness and disrespect, from ‘up yours’ to ‘I want to punch that one in the face’.
Sunday I just wanted a line drawn under this and for us to move on, today I can see just how naive I was. Where ever we end from here there’s going to be numerous death cults not giving up how unhappy they are with it.
Far from a process that settles this once for all, its like we have opened Pandora’s Box.
Commons won't allow itIts not up to the Commons - its up to the government and 27 other governments - and it only needs one.
Which EU government would refuse an extension, causing substantial pain across the EU (including their own citizens), annoying the big net payers, reducing the likelihood the Commision would be able to subsidise them, and resulting in serious problems in Ireland?
Now: I know they want the uncertainty removed, but if a clear majority of the 27 want an extension, I simply can't see it being resisted. (It's like company board meetings. There are simply never voted. The Chairman merely declares consensus.)
As I said last time if the PM wants to get a veto its very easy to get one while honouring the Common's request to the letter. Just tell the truth.
Mr Tusk,
The UK is unable to sign the deal we have agreed. The Commons is unable to agree any plan that we can agree on. We require a longer extension in order to find a solution. The only solution the Commons has been able to agree is to renegotiate the agreement to drop the backstop.
Sincerely, Theresa May
Nothing's for certain with 27 vetoes plus TMay but I think that letter would more likely result in an extension than not, as long as the elections are scheduled.
As I said last time if the PM wants to get a veto its very easy to get one while honouring the Common's request to the letter. Just tell the truth.
Mr Tusk,
The UK is unable to sign the deal we have agreed. The Commons is unable to agree any plan that we can agree on. We require a longer extension in order to find a solution. The only solution the Commons has been able to agree is to renegotiate the agreement to drop the backstop.
Sincerely, Theresa May
Nothing's for certain with 27 vetoes plus TMay but I think that letter would more likely result in an extension than not, as long as the elections are scheduled.
Ireland alone would almost certainly veto any further demand to drop the backstop and that is all that is needed to ensure EU rejection, France would likely veto too.
The EU made clear the aim is the backstop is a temporary measure until a FTA agreed that ensures no hard border in Ireland but they will not drop it
Apparently Sir Mark Sedwill the top civil servant and Mays national security adviser has written to the Cabinet regarding no deal .
Some very stark warnings especially on national security . Not a good look for the no deal nutjobs in the cabinet to play around with national security .
We only have national security if we stay in the EU? Not good for non EU countries in this world then, nor us till ‘73.
You're conflating Brexit per se with No-Deal Brexit. But I think you know that.
Call me an old person but it still kind of blows my mind that international negotiating statements by the European Commission are carefully crafted into sentences exactly 280 characters long so they'll fit in tweets
Commons won't allow itIts not up to the Commons - its up to the government and 27 other governments - and it only needs one.
Which EU government would refuse an extension, causing substantial pain across the EU (including their own citizens), annoying the big net payers, reducing the likelihood the Commision would be able to subsidise them, and resulting in serious problems in Ireland?
Now: I know they want the uncertainty removed, but if a clear majority of the 27 want an extension, I simply can't see it being resisted. (It's like company board meetings. There are simply never voted. The Chairman merely declares consensus.)
I hope you're right. But a President facing domestic trouble with public opinion in favour of a hard Brexit might be tempted....
As I said last time if the PM wants to get a veto its very easy to get one while honouring the Common's request to the letter. Just tell the truth.
Mr Tusk,
The UK is unable to sign the deal we have agreed. The Commons is unable to agree any plan that we can agree on. We require a longer extension in order to find a solution. The only solution the Commons has been able to agree is to renegotiate the agreement to drop the backstop.
Sincerely, Theresa May
Nothing's for certain with 27 vetoes plus TMay but I think that letter would more likely result in an extension than not, as long as the elections are scheduled.
Yeah my example last time was a lot passive aggressive.
As I said last time if the PM wants to get a veto its very easy to get one while honouring the Common's request to the letter. Just tell the truth.
Mr Tusk,
The UK is unable to sign the deal we have agreed. The Commons is unable to agree any plan that we can agree on. We require a longer extension in order to find a solution. The only solution the Commons has been able to agree is to renegotiate the agreement to drop the backstop.
Sincerely, Theresa May
Nothing's for certain with 27 vetoes plus TMay but I think that letter would more likely result in an extension than not, as long as the elections are scheduled.
Yeah my example last time was a lot passive aggressive.
I think that was actually less passive-aggressive than what she said last time around...
Surely the one thing everyone can agree on is trying to come up with a solution for something so important in just 11 days can't be the right thing to do. Everyone needs more time to come to a reasoned solution. This situation is the equivalent of an A-level student trying to do all their revision the night before the exam, having been too lazy to do so beforehand.
They've had three ******* years. Just take the damned test already.
What do we think happens if you combine the CU with the 2nd Ref? You can add on the missing TIGs and LDs to the CU, but how many of the current CU votes do you lose at the other end?
I don't think a second referendum works on those terms because there's no convincing counter-argument when the likes of Farage say you're not offering a proper Brexit. A May's deal versus Remain referendum works because although May's deal is a compromise with reality, and the political declaration involves smoke and mirrors, it can at least be defended as being consistent with the broad thrust of the 2016 Vote Leave platform.
It doesn't matter what we think, it matters what MPs would vote for.
However, I don't think there's really a difference there because the likes of Farage also say TMay's deal isn't a proper Brexit, and the constituency who will disagree with that but say he's right on the CU is about 4 people.
Except that if they vote through Kyle-Wilson, then at some point the Commons has to confront the fact that a confirmatory referendum isn't a "People's Vote", doesn't have Remain on the ballot paper, and results in us being right back where we started if we vote No. The sole point of KW is for Labour to pretend they're in favour of Ref2; if it starts to look like it'll pass, they'll have to pull support somehow. I'm not convinced that isn't what happened to their own Brexit plan over the weekend, and it's just about conceivable they moved away from CU towards CM today just to ensure that both failed.
I believe Kyle Wilson detail is that if the Deal is voted down the default would be Remain
Sure, that's what they want people (or perhaps People) to think. It's a clever subterfuge, entirely reliant on People not understanding what English words mean (specifically the word "confirmatory").
If it won the indicative vote once the actual referendum legislation was drawn up they would make clear the default was Remain
And try and engineer a 'deal' that leave voters wouldn't turn out in the confirmatory vote for - as even they think it would be worse than remain. Perhaps a deal which equates to staying in the EU in all but name but losing our voting rights and MEPs, keeping freedom of movement, still paying in billions to the EU and having our trade policy dictated by 43,000 people in Liechtenstein - aka Common market 2.0!
Boles's deal is no better than a bad deal - so lets just remain!
Rather than a waste of time conclusion of no no no no, I actually think we have a much clearer picture.
We aren’t dealing with two sides in this like the referendum of 2016. There are numerous incompatible death cults standing firm on what they see as positions of principle, whilst others see them as stupid, obstinate and evil. Worse, there’s increasing bitterness and disrespect, from ‘up yours’ to ‘I want to punch that one in the face’.
Sunday I just wanted a line drawn under this and for us to move on, today I can see just how naive I was. Where ever we end from here there’s going to be numerous death cults not giving up how unhappy they are with it.
Far from a process that settles this once for all, its like we have opened Pandora’s Box.
That is the negative way to view it. The positive way is that stark issues that need to be addressed by society as a whole have been exposed (which is far better than keeping them suppressed). Unfortunately, this Parliament and, in particular, this Prime Minister, have shown themselves wholly not up to the task of a managed national dialogue
So the ERG are even closer now to winning, aren’t they? No Deal inches closer. Barely a week to go.
And being closer to winning presumably puts more of them in the Drax position of being less willing to give the WA another shot.
Parliament really has disappointed when it has 'taken control'. First they didn't pass Letwin the first time even though May and co had messed everything up, then both votes after Letwin nothing passes! Multi stage, sure, but don't tell me they expected that.
Aren't the DUP going to notice, at some point, that No Deal/WTO crapfest involves a harder border than anything they tell their kids at bedtime as a horror story?
So long as its in the right place the harder the better
Comments
If your only surviving argument is the barking mad claim that voting is undemocratic you really have lost, big time.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/ng-interactive/2019/apr/01/how-did-each-mp-vote-on-the-second-round-of-indicative-votes
Also if any PB’er is in NY in June and fancies a drink feel free to VM me.
Can I call you FU?
I berated the Peoples Vote earlier and was right to do so . As a Remainer Common Market 2.0 was a compromise . Sadly as I feared some MPs are willing to play high risk poker , all or nothing .
A Peoples Vote can be added to the WAIB , it doesn’t need to be voted through now . The TIG are behaving very poorly , together with some Labour who voted against CM 2.0.
Didn't mention that PV failed to get a majority ffsake >.>
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/tony-blair-boris-johnson-would-beat-jeremy-corbyn-in-election-xw5s206v2?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR0R9EgILwflFhui0COGywhZReIu9RKhTl9b9WSIWBFecq3ARTL-OWmVgEc#Echobox=1554112562
'Mr Juncker, 64, told the Saarland regional parliament in Germany that Mr Cameron had banned him and the commission from taking part in the campaign, meaning that British voters had been deprived of the truth about the EU.
“We were forbidden from being present in any way in the referendum campaign by Mr Cameron, who is one of the great destroyers of the modern era,” Mr Juncker said.
“Because he said the commission is even less popular in the UK'
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/juncker-david-cameron-the-destroyer-silenced-me-before-brexit-vote-x8xrtx5kk?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR2vKeCXxfXocdhbRoZCVeshjKjMvTT8ezlY0F-2Fr_xtdwK1zbXH0Soa44#Echobox=1554135829
AF, having flown with them, I wouldn’t touch with a barge pole. Also I don’t trust their pilots to be able to fly a plane.
(By June you may actually be able to credit AF flights to Virgin FF too)
There is no majority for a 2nd Referendum to be found in the Commons
No problem of getting one in the Lords though
The only way that a Conservative MP could vote against their party in a vote of confidence tabled by Labour would be in the knowledge that if they would lose the Tory whip and be standing as a TIG or independent against a Conservative candidate in a few weeks time, should the VONC lead to an immediate general election. It is hard to see more than literally a handful choosing to join Boles and the Conservative TIGs in being prepared to take the nuclear option. Not quite enough to force a VONC over the line although it would be close.
Furthermore, if May tried to force an early dissolution in the unlikely event that the Cabinet agreed she would have to convince 2/3rds of the Commons to back it. A resolution could get 433 in favour with 0 against and 217 no shows and still fail.
It still seems a fairly high bar.
More words from Juncker would have been gold dust for Leave.
I have some airmiles with BA so I may use these up. What about Norwegian airlines? Any good?
Never flown with them, but I believe the planes are new and decent, but unless you get a super super cheap price, all those extras soon add up to the cost of a regular airline ticket price.
The EU looking on are in dismay , I fear the UK will be left with revoke or no deal .
I hate the idea of revoke and and despise no deal . MPs have to find a solution by Wednesday and if they can’t they must support Mays deal.
The EU will want a credible plan from us that will promise a resolution of the crisis before agreeing to an extension. I'm not sure that wanting more time because we've realised that we wasted the last two years will be good enough.
If anything, the longer this goes on the more divided and unreasonable the Commons appears to become.
Of course the Cabinet all abstained from the indicative votes - would any of the results have been different had they been given a free vote?
Surely if you voted leave you must have begun to entertain the possibility that doing so was the act of a complete and utter tosser?
I’m not a mega-flyer myself really but when I do fly I do meticulous research on airline, plane type etc. My preference is anything I can credit to BA (so OneWorld airlines). And obviously BA direct would be preferable to having to change planes in Paris, with either a tight connection or a long connection. Although BA often uses some quite knackered planes transatlantic.
Some very stark warnings especially on national security . Not a good look for the no deal nutjobs in the cabinet to play around with national security .
must be a near record number of independents is chaotic.
However, I don't think there's really a difference there because the likes of Farage also say TMay's deal isn't a proper Brexit, and the constituency who will disagree with that but say he's right on the CU is about 4 people.
https://www.airlinequality.com/airline-reviews/air-france - 5/10
Flying Business or Economy?
https://www.seatguru.com/airlines/Delta_Airlines/fleetinfo.php
https://www.seatguru.com/airlines/Air_France/fleetinfo.php
Depending on route Air France have the A380 - best plane in the air, Delta don't. Edit - Delta run the 330 LHR>JFK, Air France the 380, depending on the flight.
Delta also code-shares with Virgin, so it might be possible to get a Delta ticket on a Virgin flight.
Holding a different opinion doesn't make you insane.
As I said last time if the PM wants to get a veto its very easy to get one while honouring the Common's request to the letter. Just tell the truth.
Mr Tusk,
The UK is unable to sign the deal we have agreed. The Commons is unable to agree any plan that we can agree on. We require a longer extension in order to find a solution. The only solution the Commons has been able to agree is to renegotiate the agreement to drop the backstop.
Sincerely,
Theresa May
Sod Off and enjoy No Deal, we are keeping a seat warm for Scotland
Donald
Watch thosemDublin bilaterals Mr Rentoul.
We aren’t dealing with two sides in this like the referendum of 2016. There are numerous incompatible death cults standing firm on what they see as positions of principle, whilst others see them as stupid, obstinate and evil. Worse, there’s increasing bitterness and disrespect, from ‘up yours’ to ‘I want to punch that one in the face’.
Sunday I just wanted a line drawn under this and for us to move on, today I can see just how naive I was. Where ever we end from here there’s going to be numerous death cults not giving up how unhappy they are with it.
Far from a process that settles this once for all, its like we have opened Pandora’s Box.
Now: I know they want the uncertainty removed, but if a clear majority of the 27 want an extension, I simply can't see it being resisted. (It's like company board meetings. There are simply never voted. The Chairman merely declares consensus.)
With a little bit of planning you can ensure you're on Virgin, which is acceptable from a comfort point of view.
The EU made clear the aim is the backstop is a temporary measure until a FTA agreed that ensures no hard border in Ireland but they will not drop it
https://twitter.com/johnny_c_lillis/status/1112855886630961152?s=21
Boles's deal is no better than a bad deal - so lets just remain!
(Double entendres unintended I promise!)