So once the Tories have got Jezza to get them out of the shit May's got them into what on Earth are they going to say about Jezza in a general election?
How can they attack him for being "dangerous" a "risk to the economy" a "danger to the Union" etc etc when it's Jezza who has literally saved the country from the cliff edge the Tories themselves took us towards...
At an instant every single Tory attack line against Jezza is torn up.
The next election (which if Jezza is smart will be within weeks) will be an election where the Tories have **** all to say.
They could try saying they have better policies than him.
So once the Tories have got Jezza to get them out of the shit May's got them into what on Earth are they going to say about Jezza in a general election?
How can they attack him for being "dangerous" a "risk to the economy" a "danger to the Union" etc etc when it's Jezza who has literally saved the country from the cliff edge the Tories themselves took us towards...
At an instant every single Tory attack line against Jezza is torn up.
The next election (which if Jezza is smart will be within weeks) will be an election where the Tories have **** all to say.
They could try saying they have better policies than him.
The Tories have policies? Who knew!!!!
I was hoping they could at least attempt to come up with some. A risky gamble to be sure.
The erg may as well pull the plug on the government they have nothing to lose . VONC and general election . If corbyn wins the tories will have a new leader who can campaign on real brexit platform
Can you explain how the ERG call a vonc
Hundred plus tories side with opposition
You are upset and not thinking this through
A vonc would need to be called by the opposition party and any conservative vonc results in instant loss of the whip and cannot stand as a conservative in the next election
I would expect no conservatives vonc their own government but if so, they are no loss to the party
We don't have a majority - we could lose a VONC with every Tory voting with the Govt...
There are also 4 fewer Tory MPs than there were 2 months ago.
Although Boles will probably make an emotional speech tomorrow recanting his emotional speech of yesterday.
There are fewer Labour MPs as well. You can't count on the various independents voting with Corbyn against the government. They'll do what they think is in their interests (or their view of the country's interests, which is much the same thing).
I cannot see the TIGs doing anything other than voting against the Government in a vote of confidence precipitated by Brexit. They might not want an immediate VONC being justifiably fearful that they would lose their seats, but if one were called their hand would be forced.
According to the times, A judge told a court it is a fundamental human right for a man to have sex with his wife.
Time for him to retire I think, about 280 years ago.
A fundamental (and not under all circumstances inalienable) right when the institution which is asking the judge whether it can prevent the sex is the state, rather than an unwilling wife who is saying no.
The manufactured outraged over an out of context sentence is as predictable as it is exhausting.
I cannot see the TIGs doing anything other than voting against the Government in a vote of confidence precipitated by Brexit. They might not want an immediate VONC being justifiably fearful that they would lose their seats, but if one were called their hand would be forced.
Maybe. I wouldn't underestimate the ability of politicians to come up with good reasons why 'this is not the time', or to demand a reasonable price for selling their principles.
Are you happy brexit is now going to happen William? Relieved? Where does your fight go from here?
Brexit going to happen? What makes you think that?
Mays deal + CU plus confirmatory ref is still brexit isn’t it?
a confirmatory ref would mean a strong chance we vote Remain.
Confirmatory ref won’t have remain on it. It’s a confirmatory ref like 75. Do you back Tess and Jez lovebird deal y/n
Don't be naive. In any referendum the 'no' option would mean revocation.
This has been
There’s a thousand ways to ref this. The most sensible one once it passes the commons is do you back it yes/no. Simple as that.
Just like 75, do you accept Labours renegotiation on terms of entry. All no meant back in 75 was tweak it again, maybe back to people again. Or maybe not, don’t have to once through Parliament. Heath didn’t bother.
That’s a confirmatory vote
What, when you heard corbyn talking about one you thought it was something different did you?
Bottom line, the great remain dream also died tonight.
I don't think Remain died tonight. If the outcome is that a very soft Brexit gets put up against Remain in a referendum, with Labour, Lib Dems, TIG, SNP et al campaigning for Remain, I imagine that lots of Brexit supporters would not bother to vote, and Remain would win.
It would be a different matter, I think, if the Conservative and Labour frontbenchers struck a deal, and were both committed to campaign in favour of it in a referendum. In that case, voting for the deal would seem the sensible option.
It’s a support this deal y/n referendum with no being meaningless
That’s the confirmatory ref. You can’t vote remain. It doesn’t have remain on it.
The remain dream is dead. It’s over. It is n- I won’t do the whole sean_t paragraph you know what I am saying. Tess and Jez lovebird deal passes commons, any ref does not have remain on it in name or any shape or form.
It’s a support this deal y/n referendum with no being meaningless
That’s the confirmatory ref. You can’t vote remain. It doesn’t have remain on it.
The remain dream is dead. It’s over. It is n- I won’t do the whole sean_t paragraph you know what I am saying. Tess and Jez lovebird deal passes commons, any ref does not have remain on it in name or any shape or form.
For the sake of argument, what do you think happens if people vote 'no'?
So once the Tories have got Jezza to get them out of the shit May's got them into what on Earth are they going to say about Jezza in a general election?
How can they attack him for being "dangerous" a "risk to the economy" a "danger to the Union" etc etc when it's Jezza who has literally saved the country from the cliff edge the Tories themselves took us towards...
At an instant every single Tory attack line against Jezza is torn up.
The next election (which if Jezza is smart will be within weeks) will be an election where the Tories have **** all to say.
Since you are a Corbyn supporter, you should be happy.
The premature letters to Graham Brady by the headbangers looking more and more like a masterstroke today...
Who was it who redrafted the Conservative Party constitution to provide for circumstances where there could be a 12 month period where there was absolutely no way of removing a party leader who refused to go?
It’s a support this deal y/n referendum with no being meaningless
That’s the confirmatory ref. You can’t vote remain. It doesn’t have remain on it.
The remain dream is dead. It’s over. It is n- I won’t do the whole sean_t paragraph you know what I am saying. Tess and Jez lovebird deal passes commons, any ref does not have remain on it in name or any shape or form.
For the sake of argument, what do you think happens if people vote 'no'?
Which of course they will...
But I don't think Jezza will push for a confirmatory ref. If he's got any sense he'll demand a general election no later then July.
It’s a support this deal y/n referendum with no being meaningless
That’s the confirmatory ref. You can’t vote remain. It doesn’t have remain on it.
The remain dream is dead. It’s over. It is n- I won’t do the whole sean_t paragraph you know what I am saying. Tess and Jez lovebird deal passes commons, any ref does not have remain on it in name or any shape or form.
For the sake of argument, what do you think happens if people vote 'no'?
The same as what would have happened in 1975.
1975 wasn’t an in out ref. It was a like Labours renegotiation y/n confirmatory ref.
Let’s have the argument. Many people’s understanding of the 75 ref is all over the place. More shocking is the number of people who thought 75 was an in out ref, unaware we went in 73 without a ref.
If we clear up a no in 75 we clear up this coming one as it’s also a confirmatory
It’s a support this deal y/n referendum with no being meaningless
That’s the confirmatory ref. You can’t vote remain. It doesn’t have remain on it.
The remain dream is dead. It’s over. It is n- I won’t do the whole sean_t paragraph you know what I am saying. Tess and Jez lovebird deal passes commons, any ref does not have remain on it in name or any shape or form.
For the sake of argument, what do you think happens if people vote 'no'?
Which of course they will...
But I don't think Jezza will push for a confirmatory ref. If he's got any sense he'll demand a general election no later then July.
Which would allow enough time for May to go and Boris to be elected Tory leader anyway, even Blair thinks Boris beats Corbyn
Apparently the EU will insist on the UK being ready to contest EU elections in case the WAIB hits the buffers .
If that’s no problem then the UK will leave on May 22 nd . They want that insurance policy in case the UK needs more time .
They’ve obviously seen through Mays attempt to still make it deal or no deal by May 22 nd. They clearly know what’s going on and aren’t falling for any crap.
The premature letters to Graham Brady by the headbangers looking more and more like a masterstroke today...
Who was it who redrafted the Conservative Party constitution to provide for circumstances where there could be a 12 month period where there was absolutely no way of removing a party leader who refused to go?
The premature letters to Graham Brady by the headbangers looking more and more like a masterstroke today...
Who was it who redrafted the Conservative Party constitution to provide for circumstances where there could be a 12 month period where there was absolutely no way of removing a party leader who refused to go?
It’s a support this deal y/n referendum with no being meaningless
That’s the confirmatory ref. You can’t vote remain. It doesn’t have remain on it.
The remain dream is dead. It’s over. It is n- I won’t do the whole sean_t paragraph you know what I am saying. Tess and Jez lovebird deal passes commons, any ref does not have remain on it in name or any shape or form.
For the sake of argument, what do you think happens if people vote 'no'?
The same as what would have happened in 1975.
1975 wasn’t an in out ref. It was a like Labours renegotiation y/n confirmatory ref.
Let’s have the argument. Many people’s understanding of the 75 ref is all over the place. More shocking is the number of people who thought 75 was an in out ref, unaware we went in 73 without a ref.
If we clear up a no in 75 we clear up this coming one as it’s also a confirmatory
It’s a support this deal y/n referendum with no being meaningless
That’s the confirmatory ref. You can’t vote remain. It doesn’t have remain on it.
The remain dream is dead. It’s over. It is n- I won’t do the whole sean_t paragraph you know what I am saying. Tess and Jez lovebird deal passes commons, any ref does not have remain on it in name or any shape or form.
For the sake of argument, what do you think happens if people vote 'no'?
The same as what would have happened in 1975.
1975 wasn’t an in out ref. It was a like Labours renegotiation y/n confirmatory ref.
Let’s have the argument. Many people’s understanding of the 75 ref is all over the place. More shocking is the number of people who thought 75 was an in out ref, unaware we went in 73 without a ref.
If we clear up a no in 75 we clear up this coming one as it’s also a confirmatory
1975 was a clear question.
Who drafted the question? It has the feel of something Harold Wilson himself might have come up with.
It’s a support this deal y/n referendum with no being meaningless
That’s the confirmatory ref. You can’t vote remain. It doesn’t have remain on it.
The remain dream is dead. It’s over. It is n- I won’t do the whole sean_t paragraph you know what I am saying. Tess and Jez lovebird deal passes commons, any ref does not have remain on it in name or any shape or form.
For the sake of argument, what do you think happens if people vote 'no'?
Which of course they will...
But I don't think Jezza will push for a confirmatory ref. If he's got any sense he'll demand a general election no later then July.
No the people will back the Tess Jez lovebird deal 60/40. They may not have 3 years ago. Not just because the people are now brexit tired and pleased for a resolution, it will get an easier ride from the media, and loyalists of both main party’s behind it.
The erg may as well pull the plug on the government they have nothing to lose . VONC and general election . If corbyn wins the tories will have a new leader who can campaign on real brexit platform
Replace ERG with DUP and that makes some sense. Anything cobbled up with Corbyn is going to threaten the union.
And without the DUP, the Conservatives following defections have only 312 voting MPs, compared to 326 others, so a VONC could pass.
Anything that is not No Deal reduces the threat to the Union
Wrong, the threat comes from the backstop within May's WA and variants which would still be based on the WA. Besides, it is the DUP you need to convince and I suspect they share my view. We can though agree that Revoke is not a threat and I think the DUP would agree with that too, which is why there is I think the prospect of them pulling the plug in a VONC if faced with the prospect of a WA variant eventually passing.
Wrong, the backstop does not threaten the Union, most voters in NI support it, it is No Deal and a hard border they oppose.
The DUP have made some positive noises about SM and CU, a more BINO Brexit suits them fine unlike the ERG
It’s a support this deal y/n referendum with no being meaningless
That’s the confirmatory ref. You can’t vote remain. It doesn’t have remain on it.
The remain dream is dead. It’s over. It is n- I won’t do the whole sean_t paragraph you know what I am saying. Tess and Jez lovebird deal passes commons, any ref does not have remain on it in name or any shape or form.
For the sake of argument, what do you think happens if people vote 'no'?
The same as what would have happened in 1975.
1975 wasn’t an in out ref. It was a like Labours renegotiation y/n confirmatory ref.
Let’s have the argument. Many people’s understanding of the 75 ref is all over the place. More shocking is the number of people who thought 75 was an in out ref, unaware we went in 73 without a ref.
If we clear up a no in 75 we clear up this coming one as it’s also a confirmatory
1975 was a clear question.
Who drafted the question? It has the feel of something Harold Wilson himself might have come up with.
It was not an in out referendum. No would not have been out.
What did the legislation say about how binding the result is 😉
The erg may as well pull the plug on the government they have nothing to lose . VONC and general election . If corbyn wins the tories will have a new leader who can campaign on real brexit platform
Can you explain how the ERG call a vonc
Hypothetically speaking; If Corbyn is informed he has the numbers, he'll call one. The only thing he wants is a GE.
No it isn't, there is still a very strong Unionist vote in Scotland, the fact No Deal Brexiteers could not care less about the Union and are happy to try and push Scotland over the line to independence and Northern Ireland to a United Ireland does not change the fact that a pragmatic Brexit plus eventual Devomax could secure Scotland's place in the UK
Oh give it a damned rest, Scotland is already gone. NI too. The trends have been going on with the tacit support of Westminster for years. To trying to blackmail people with it now is beyond a joke.
P.S, not sure what this has to do with Corbyn wanting a GE?
No they are not, just No Deal fanatics like you could not care less about them or the Union
It’s a support this deal y/n referendum with no being meaningless
That’s the confirmatory ref. You can’t vote remain. It doesn’t have remain on it.
The remain dream is dead. It’s over. It is n- I won’t do the whole sean_t paragraph you know what I am saying. Tess and Jez lovebird deal passes commons, any ref does not have remain on it in name or any shape or form.
For the sake of argument, what do you think happens if people vote 'no'?
The same as what would have happened in 1975.
1975 wasn’t an in out ref. It was a like Labours renegotiation y/n confirmatory ref.
Let’s have the argument. Many people’s understanding of the 75 ref is all over the place. More shocking is the number of people who thought 75 was an in out ref, unaware we went in 73 without a ref.
If we clear up a no in 75 we clear up this coming one as it’s also a confirmatory
1975 was a clear question.
Who drafted the question? It has the feel of something Harold Wilson himself might have come up with.
It was not an in out referendum. No would not have been out.
What did the legislation say about how binding the result is 😉
I will put my hand up if I am proved wrong. I understand the renegotiation had already been accepted by parliament before the people’s say, and the legislation setting up the 75 ref didn’t actually state what government should do in either yes or no.
75 wasn’t really a national interest thing. Firstly Heath very much against a plebiscite, the era he came from fascists used them. Labour had more of a problem with being vociferously split, the almost phoney remogotiation and public vote was the more euroagnostic Wilson’s wheeze for settling the argument in his own party. If anyone claims if the ref said no he would have unpicked all the legislation andtaken is out, i’ll dispute that. But as I said, happy to put my hand up if proved wrong.
An awful lot of people are talking about the May-Corbyn Compromise as if it were a done deal already - but all that little address from the podium tonight did was to outline a possible plan of action.
Until said plan yields results, nothing has changed.
Agreed. In fact, it will probably come to nothing.
Surely the only point of the alleged May-Corbyn deal is to scare the ERG into voting for Mrs May's WA for fear of something worse.
And Jeremy Corbyn is only talking to Mrs May because he sees the possibility that it will tear the Conservative Party asunder.
Basically, these is no real likelihood that this leads to some kind of stichup.
Much more worrying for the ERG-ers is the possibility that a law is passed that requires the executive to apply for a long extension.
An awful lot of people are talking about the May-Corbyn Compromise as if it were a done deal already - but all that little address from the podium tonight did was to outline a possible plan of action.
Until said plan yields results, nothing has changed.
Agreed. In fact, it will probably come to nothing.
Surely the only point of the alleged May-Corbyn deal is to scare the ERG into voting for Mrs May's WA for fear of something worse.
And Jeremy Corbyn is only talking to Mrs May because he sees the possibility that it will tear the Conservative Party asunder.
Basically, these is no real likelihood that this leads to some kind of stichup.
Much more worrying for the ERG-ers is the possibility that a law is passed that requires the executive to apply for a long extension.
The ERG can't provide the numbers to get May's deal through so I don't think that's the point of it.
The UK has to give notice that the EU elections will go ahead at the latest by next Friday. If that happens, the implementation of Brexit will be on the backburner.
Canada's prime minister has kicked two MPs from his party's caucus after they accused him of meddling in a criminal case involving an influential company.
Jody Wilson-Raybould and Jane Philpott had already resigned from PM Justin Trudeau's cabinet citing their concerns over the SNC-Lavalin affair.
Now they have been expelled from Mr Trudeau's Liberal Party, months before a general election.
The SNC-Lavalin controversy has cast a shadow over Mr Trudeau's leadership.
Andrew Scheer, the leader of the opposition Conservatives, said on Tuesday that the prime minister had betrayed justice by removing two corruption whistleblowers.
"Wrong, the backstop does not threaten the Union, most voters in NI support it, it is No Deal and a hard border they oppose.
The DUP have made some positive noises about SM and CU, a more BINO Brexit suits them fine unlike the ERG"
Not sure if they are that bothered about freedom of movement though given pretty much every in NI keeps it anyway. I wonder how many DUP MPs have Irish passports - given they are Irish citizens by birthright. That nice wallet sized Irish passport card is so much more portable!
So they could possibly live with a UK wide customs union outside the single market post transition.
I hope these Tory membership cards can be recycled, or are biodegradable.
I expect Nigel Farage will be organising a recycling campaign - send them to him by post with a cheque for £25 and he will recycle it into a Brexit party supporters card by return of post. You will be a member in all but name and have no voting rights - so a bit like our new future arrangements with the EU.
Canada's prime minister has kicked two MPs from his party's caucus after they accused him of meddling in a criminal case involving an influential company.
Jody Wilson-Raybould and Jane Philpott had already resigned from PM Justin Trudeau's cabinet citing their concerns over the SNC-Lavalin affair.
Now they have been expelled from Mr Trudeau's Liberal Party, months before a general election.
The SNC-Lavalin controversy has cast a shadow over Mr Trudeau's leadership.
Andrew Scheer, the leader of the opposition Conservatives, said on Tuesday that the prime minister had betrayed justice by removing two corruption whistleblowers.
Ignoring how Brexit turns out this could be a game changer for Corbyn. Provided he and May produce a result and he handles the PR side well this could be the biggest leg up to becoming PM that he could have had.
Whatever May proposes however unpalatable he just has to get his name on the dotted line. The country want it solrted and if Corbyn looks like he's responsible he should sail to victory at the next GE.
Ignoring how Brexit turns out this could be a game changer for Corbyn. Provided he and May produce a result and he handles the PR side well this could be the biggest leg up to becoming PM that he could have had.
Whatever May proposes however unpalatable he just has to get his name on the dotted line. The country want it solrted and if Corbyn looks like he's responsible he should sail to victory at the next GE.
Perhaps you could help with a PB phrase guide. A couple of immediate thoughts:
"provided [conditions are met] Y [could] happen" - I've added qualifiers galore to pretend a guess has some meaning. Don't quote me later when I spin on a top.
"I'm hearing rumours that...." - I want to imply I'm in the know but am just reading The Telegraph/Guardian and quoting on an unattributed basis
"Your party has been destroyed by..." - I am obsessed by one subject and assume that everybody else is the same as me.
Agreed. In fact, it will probably come to nothing.
Surely the only point of the alleged May-Corbyn deal is to scare the ERG into voting for Mrs May's WA for fear of something worse.
And Jeremy Corbyn is only talking to Mrs May because he sees the possibility that it will tear the Conservative Party asunder.
Basically, these is no real likelihood that this leads to some kind of stichup.
Much more worrying for the ERG-ers is the possibility that a law is passed that requires the executive to apply for a long extension.
I agree with you that this doesn't look hopeful. But the object isn't to pressure the ERG.
We don't need to have been in Cabinet to know what happened. We know their primary objective is to hold the Cabinet together and the secondary is to deliver Brexit.
Any movement from the WA in either direction upsets one faction and leads to resignations. The only thing, quite literally, that they can unite around is the WA exactly as it is now; they have no room to manoeuvre whatsoever. Appreciating this obvious reality took up hours of the meeting. It is the end result of Mrs May carefully balancing her Cabinet between remainers and leavers: she has created a body unable to lean one way or the other without falling over.
So the problem becomes how to deliver the WA exactly as it is, and on time. They know the rump of the ERG is irreconcilable. None of the smaller parties are large enough to provide insurance against losing more of the ERG, except the SNP, and the government already knows that whatever the SNP would want for Scotland won't be acceptable. They know that peeling off more Labour backbenchers by trying to go around the leadership won't work. Thus the only road leads to Corbyn.
Corbyn could ask for almost anything except for a change to the WA, since the Tories have nothing to bargain with except for a game of chicken with the country where the Tories also lose whether they blink or not. In political terms, Corbyn could ask a small change to the WA knowing the government would fall over if it accepted. Or Corby could ask for a lot on the PD, knowing the government has to give, having nowhere else to go. Except the problem is trust - how to try and tie a party and its unknown future leader to whatever could be agreed.
The position is of course unsustainable once the WA is agreed, and the world is going to fall in once the Tories and Parliament start discussing the PD (or indeed whatever is promised on the PD advances the crisis and makes it challenging to pass the WA anyway, save for the ticking clock). Hence we should be really gloomy about what lies ahead.
All May wants is the WA delivered so we have legally Brexited and she can resign from Parliament with some sort of honour.
Ignoring how Brexit turns out this could be a game changer for Corbyn. Provided he and May produce a result and he handles the PR side well this could be the biggest leg up to becoming PM that he could have had.
Whatever May proposes however unpalatable he just has to get his name on the dotted line. The country want it solrted and if Corbyn looks like he's responsible he should sail to victory at the next GE.
Perhaps you could help with a PB phrase guide. A couple of immediate thoughts:
"provided [conditions are met] Y [could] happen" - I've added qualifiers galore to pretend a guess has some meaning. Don't quote me later when I spin on a top.
"I'm hearing rumours that...." - I want to imply I'm in the know but am just reading The Telegraph/Guardian and quoting on an unattributed basis
"Your party has been destroyed by..." - I am obsessed by one subject and assume that everybody else is the same as me.
I enjoyed your last two. You make a fair point. After Mike's 50/1 on Obama we're all wannabe tipsters. Talking of which though it doesn't help with your phrase guide I just heard someone obscure on the radio say they had a strong hunch that Beto O'Rourke and someone with an unpronouncable name from Indiana are his tip for democrat nomination. I'm just putting it on record so I can claim credit if either win and put behind me my Obama slip
I'm registered to vote in Twickenham but am spending most of my time in West Dorset, a second home. Are there any ramifications if I register to vote in West Dorset with the intention of voting here in any GE?
So long as you only vote once it’s ok
(There may also be council tax implications for primary residence)
I'm registered to vote in Twickenham but am spending most of my time in West Dorset, a second home. Are there any ramifications if I register to vote in West Dorset with the intention of voting here in any GE?
So long as you only vote once it’s ok
(There may also be council tax implications for primary residence)
I'm registered to vote in Twickenham but am spending most of my time in West Dorset, a second home. Are there any ramifications if I register to vote in West Dorset with the intention of voting here in any GE?
So long as you only vote once it’s ok
(There may also be council tax implications for primary residence)
Not as simple as that - I will copy to next thread
Comments
The manufactured outraged over an out of context sentence is as predictable as it is exhausting.
That’s the confirmatory ref. You can’t vote remain. It doesn’t have remain on it.
The remain dream is dead. It’s over. It is n- I won’t do the whole sean_t paragraph you know what I am saying. Tess and Jez lovebird deal passes commons, any ref does not have remain on it in name or any shape or form.
But I don't think Jezza will push for a confirmatory ref. If he's got any sense he'll demand a general election no later then July.
1975 wasn’t an in out ref. It was a like Labours renegotiation y/n confirmatory ref.
Let’s have the argument. Many people’s understanding of the 75 ref is all over the place. More shocking is the number of people who thought 75 was an in out ref, unaware we went in 73 without a ref.
If we clear up a no in 75 we clear up this coming one as it’s also a confirmatory
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/tony-blair-corbyn-boris-johnson-general-election-tory-leader-brexit-a8849011.html
If that’s no problem then the UK will leave on May 22 nd . They want that insurance policy in case the UK needs more time .
They’ve obviously seen through Mays attempt to still make it deal or no deal by May 22 nd. They clearly know what’s going on and aren’t falling for any crap.
The DUP have made some positive noises about SM and CU, a more BINO Brexit suits them fine unlike the ERG
What did the legislation say about how binding the result is 😉
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6879215/English-Democrats-begin-court-battle-prove-UK-left-EU.html
75 wasn’t really a national interest thing. Firstly Heath very much against a plebiscite, the era he came from fascists used them. Labour had more of a problem with being vociferously split, the almost phoney remogotiation and public vote was the more euroagnostic Wilson’s wheeze for settling the argument in his own party. If anyone claims if the ref said no he would have unpicked all the legislation andtaken is out, i’ll dispute that. But as I said, happy to put my hand up if proved wrong.
And Jeremy Corbyn is only talking to Mrs May because he sees the possibility that it will tear the Conservative Party asunder.
Basically, these is no real likelihood that this leads to some kind of stichup.
Much more worrying for the ERG-ers is the possibility that a law is passed that requires the executive to apply for a long extension.
No need to argue about Brexit any more. Simply free your mind, and understand that it has happened.
The UK has to give notice that the EU elections will go ahead at the latest by next Friday. If that happens, the implementation of Brexit will be on the backburner.
Canada's prime minister has kicked two MPs from his party's caucus after they accused him of meddling in a criminal case involving an influential company.
Jody Wilson-Raybould and Jane Philpott had already resigned from PM Justin Trudeau's cabinet citing their concerns over the SNC-Lavalin affair.
Now they have been expelled from Mr Trudeau's Liberal Party, months before a general election.
The SNC-Lavalin controversy has cast a shadow over Mr Trudeau's leadership.
Andrew Scheer, the leader of the opposition Conservatives, said on Tuesday that the prime minister had betrayed justice by removing two corruption whistleblowers.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-47754193
"Wrong, the backstop does not threaten the Union, most voters in NI support it, it is No Deal and a hard border they oppose.
The DUP have made some positive noises about SM and CU, a more BINO Brexit suits them fine unlike the ERG"
Not sure if they are that bothered about freedom of movement though given pretty much every in NI keeps it anyway. I wonder how many DUP MPs have Irish passports - given they are Irish citizens by birthright. That nice wallet sized Irish passport card is so much more portable!
So they could possibly live with a UK wide customs union outside the single market post transition.
Whatever May proposes however unpalatable he just has to get his name on the dotted line. The country want it solrted and if Corbyn looks like he's responsible he should sail to victory at the next GE.
"provided [conditions are met] Y [could] happen" - I've added qualifiers galore to pretend a guess has some meaning. Don't quote me later when I spin on a top.
"I'm hearing rumours that...." - I want to imply I'm in the know but am just reading The Telegraph/Guardian and quoting on an unattributed basis
"Your party has been destroyed by..." - I am obsessed by one subject and assume that everybody else is the same as me.
We don't need to have been in Cabinet to know what happened. We know their primary objective is to hold the Cabinet together and the secondary is to deliver Brexit.
Any movement from the WA in either direction upsets one faction and leads to resignations. The only thing, quite literally, that they can unite around is the WA exactly as it is now; they have no room to manoeuvre whatsoever. Appreciating this obvious reality took up hours of the meeting. It is the end result of Mrs May carefully balancing her Cabinet between remainers and leavers: she has created a body unable to lean one way or the other without falling over.
So the problem becomes how to deliver the WA exactly as it is, and on time. They know the rump of the ERG is irreconcilable. None of the smaller parties are large enough to provide insurance against losing more of the ERG, except the SNP, and the government already knows that whatever the SNP would want for Scotland won't be acceptable. They know that peeling off more Labour backbenchers by trying to go around the leadership won't work. Thus the only road leads to Corbyn.
Corbyn could ask for almost anything except for a change to the WA, since the Tories have nothing to bargain with except for a game of chicken with the country where the Tories also lose whether they blink or not. In political terms, Corbyn could ask a small change to the WA knowing the government would fall over if it accepted. Or Corby could ask for a lot on the PD, knowing the government has to give, having nowhere else to go. Except the problem is trust - how to try and tie a party and its unknown future leader to whatever could be agreed.
The position is of course unsustainable once the WA is agreed, and the world is going to fall in once the Tories and Parliament start discussing the PD (or indeed whatever is promised on the PD advances the crisis and makes it challenging to pass the WA anyway, save for the ticking clock). Hence we should be really gloomy about what lies ahead.
All May wants is the WA delivered so we have legally Brexited and she can resign from Parliament with some sort of honour.
(There may also be council tax implications for primary residence)
Try these......
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3684475/Are-funniest-agony-aunt-letters-ever.html