And argue with me at your peril, because what I have described here is exactly what is going to happen, complete with the comfortable yes win.
Your prognosticatory track record is thus far 0%.
You think asking the electorate “do you wish to prolong this shit or move onto tackling housing crisis etc” doesn’t resolve this with a clear answer, you carry on there in deluded corner.
You are suggesting that they'll choose the "prolong this shit" answer.
Posted at 1034. Confirmatory y/n gets public backing for reason I described. No good for PV or remainiacs or ERG but they would be buried in such a ref. Like in 75. What I intended when I began writing the post is warning Isam and others what is a ref? Truth is people think what they choose to think when they hear the word, but it could take all sorts of crafted forms
Virtually no-one "wants" a referendum (revoke and no deal are apparently more popular) but, of course, to avoid revoke or no deal it seems like the only way out, especially as a GE is apparently off the agenda....but you would need two referendum options that would give a clear outcome, this uncertainty can't continue.
Fascinating to look at the breakdown of the 313-312 vote overnight. The Conservatives overwhelmingly against but 14 rebels supported Cooper-Letwin but 9 Labour MPs and three Independents opposed. Had the Conservatives stayed united, Cooper-Letwin would have fallen so do we call this another Government defeat? Possibly.
In truth, it doesn't mean a great deal. Presumably the May/Corbyn talks will achieve little or nothing - the signs yesterday, for all the early bravado, weren't positive so it looks as though come Monday it will be MV4 in some form but again little evidence it will clear the Commons.
On then to Wednesday next and the Prime Minister at the EU Summit where the road really begins to run out. If I understand the EU line, May will be told it's either game over on Friday or she has to sign up to an 18-24 month extension involving the EU elections.
The Conservative Party now seems to be moving toward the former and would the latter even be politically acceptable now? As is often the case, with the passage of time and the course of events, opinions have evolved and hardened. The "let's get it over with" camp now see "No Deal" being a better option than months of interminable limbo status.
I genuinely don't know how an 18-24 month extension would be viewed by the Cabinet and the wider Conservative Party - resignations? Seems possible but there's no mechanism I can see that would force May out short of a complete split in the Party which still seems improbable at this time.
Customs union and the WA will pass on Monday and we will be out on the 22nd may - mays withdrawal and corbyns CU and free vote on the package, no referendum
New Con leader, new approach, kick the CU into touch after a GE next May.
will they be legally able to "kick the CU into touch"
After a GE they can do what they like, no parliament can bind the next
Didn’t corbyn say he wanted any agreement writing into law to stop a future Tory reneging
I've decided that the solution to Brexit is simple. All you need to do is work out what is the worst possible outcome for the UK and then work on the basis that is what the incompetent twats that we call MPs will ultimately choose.
The worst outcome, by a distance, is a long period of extension where we continue with current levels of uncertainty, discourage international investment, continue to pay into the pot, paralyse our politics, divide our country ever more deeply about possible second referendums etc etc. Its much worse than the deal, deal +CU, no deal, revoke, pretty much anything less insane.
And argue with me at your peril, because what I have described here is exactly what is going to happen, complete with the comfortable yes win.
Your prognosticatory track record is thus far 0%.
You think asking the electorate “do you wish to prolong this shit or move onto tackling housing crisis etc” doesn’t resolve this with a clear answer, you carry on there in deluded corner.
You are suggesting that they'll choose the "prolong this shit" answer.
Posted at 1034. Confirmatory y/n gets public backing for reason I described. No good for PV or remainiacs or ERG but they would be buried in such a ref. Like in 75. What I intended when I began writing the post is warning Isam and others what is a ref? Truth is people think what they choose to think when they hear the word, but it could take all sorts of crafted forms
Virtually no-one "wants" a referendum (revoke and no deal are apparently more popular) but, of course, to avoid revoke or no deal it seems like the only way out, especially as a GE is apparently off the agenda....but you would need two referendum options that would give a clear outcome, this uncertainty can't continue.
But the uncertainty will continue. The losers will not accept the result
I've decided that the solution to Brexit is simple. All you need to do is work out what is the worst possible outcome for the UK and then work on the basis that is what the incompetent twats that we call MPs will ultimately choose.
The worst outcome, by a distance, is a long period of extension where we continue with current levels of uncertainty, discourage international investment, continue to pay into the pot, paralyse our politics, divide our country ever more deeply about possible second referendums etc etc. Its much worse than the deal, deal +CU, no deal, revoke, pretty much anything less insane.
How about this? May and corbyn agree to promote CU and the WA with parliament oversight/approval of the negotiation. Victory for parliament but keeps May and the Tories in place as a GE would reset things? Will they fudge something like that?
There's very little time to pass any deal now, and the EU is going to come under multiple pressures if leaders agree to extend for a deal which is not guaranteed to pass.
Normally a fan of @cyclefree articles but I'm not really seeing this one tbh. Both are disrupters who reject the status quo but that does not make them alike. They are both bad in their own ways and have their own collections of prejudices, biases and idiocies which don't overlap.
It's always possible to draw parallels between any two people, but apart from the "change for the mainstream" theme, I think the differences are more obvious. Trump's modus operandi is to attack opponents personally with smeary nicknames. Corbyn's modus operandi is to drone on about his policy agenda and ignore even valid opportunities to attack opponents personally. Faced with something uncomfortable, Trump's instinct is to lie about it. Corbyn's is to try to justify it. (Most politicians opt for a third option - to evade it.)
"Corbyn's modus operandi is to drone on about his policy agenda and ignore even valid opportunities to attack opponents personally."
Well, you would say that. It's easy to put it differently: Corbyn sits back as those around him, and whom he could reign in, attack opponents *very* personally. He's not stupid, and he knows what happens.
An example is the anti-Semitism your party has descended into. It would have been easy for him to staunch this two years ago and to stop his underlings and followers. But he chose not to.
I've decided that the solution to Brexit is simple. All you need to do is work out what is the worst possible outcome for the UK and then work on the basis that is what the incompetent twats that we call MPs will ultimately choose.
The worst outcome, by a distance, is a long period of extension where we continue with current levels of uncertainty, discourage international investment, continue to pay into the pot, paralyse our politics, divide our country ever more deeply about possible second referendums etc etc. Its much worse than the deal, deal +CU, no deal, revoke, pretty much anything less insane.
So that is what they will go for.
Sustained No Deal is the worst option.
It really isn't. Business needs rules. Once it has a set of rules it can work to and around them. Right now we have no idea what the rules are going to be on 13th April, or 23rd May, or whenever the can gets kicked to next. That is the worst possible outcome. That is what we will get.
And argue with me at your peril, because what I have described here is exactly what is going to happen, complete with the comfortable yes win.
Your prognosticatory track record is thus far 0%.
You think asking the electorate “do you wish to prolong this shit or move onto tackling housing crisis etc” doesn’t resolve this with a clear answer, you carry on there in deluded corner.
You are suggesting that they'll choose the "prolong this shit" answer.
Posted at 1034. Confirmatory y/n gets public backing for reason I described. No good for PV or remainiacs or ERG but they would be buried in such a ref. Like in 75. What I intended when I began writing the post is warning Isam and others what is a ref? Truth is people think what they choose to think when they hear the word, but it could take all sorts of crafted forms
Virtually no-one "wants" a referendum (revoke and no deal are apparently more popular) but, of course, to avoid revoke or no deal it seems like the only way out, especially as a GE is apparently off the agenda....but you would need two referendum options that would give a clear outcome, this uncertainty can't continue.
But the uncertainty will continue. The losers will not accept the result
Maybe - but that will principally be a hard core minority (not 52% or 48% of the population); most of the rest of us are sick to the back teeth of this and just want some resolution.
I've decided that the solution to Brexit is simple. All you need to do is work out what is the worst possible outcome for the UK and then work on the basis that is what the incompetent twats that we call MPs will ultimately choose.
The worst outcome, by a distance, is a long period of extension where we continue with current levels of uncertainty, discourage international investment, continue to pay into the pot, paralyse our politics, divide our country ever more deeply about possible second referendums etc etc. Its much worse than the deal, deal +CU, no deal, revoke, pretty much anything less insane.
So that is what they will go for.
Sustained No Deal is the worst option.
It really isn't. Business needs rules. Once it has a set of rules it can work to and around them. Right now we have no idea what the rules are going to be on 13th April, or 23rd May, or whenever the can gets kicked to next. That is the worst possible outcome. That is what we will get.
Sustained no deal would be an utter disaster. Strong signalling function to the rest of the world and the international business community that the UK has taken complete leave of its senses; and that's before any of the (numerous) practical implications.
How about this? May and corbyn agree to promote CU and the WA with parliament oversight/approval of the negotiation. Victory for parliament but keeps May and the Tories in place as a GE would reset things? Will they fudge something like that?
There's very little time to pass any deal now, and the EU is going to come under multiple pressures if leaders agree to extend for a deal which is not guaranteed to pass.
The EU just went the WA passed, they couldn't give a crap what we are arguing about after that. The WA could pass if corbyn and may whip it attached to the agreed IV winner - cu, common market 2 being likely one or the other. Referendum will quietly disappear
And argue with me at your peril, because what I have described here is exactly what is going to happen, complete with the comfortable yes win.
Your prognosticatory track record is thus far 0%.
You think asking the electorate “do you wish to prolong this shit or move onto tackling housing crisis etc” doesn’t resolve this with a clear answer, you carry on there in deluded corner.
You are suggesting that they'll choose the "prolong this shit" answer.
Posted at 1034. Confirmatory y/n gets public backing for reason I described. No good for PV or remainiacs or ERG but they would be buried in such a ref. Like in 75. What I intended when I began writing the post is warning Isam and others what is a ref? Truth is people think what they choose to think when they hear the word, but it could take all sorts of crafted forms
Virtually no-one "wants" a referendum (revoke and no deal are apparently more popular) but, of course, to avoid revoke or no deal it seems like the only way out, especially as a GE is apparently off the agenda....but you would need two referendum options that would give a clear outcome, this uncertainty can't continue.
I disagree you need two ref options on the paper. That’s the central thrust of my argument. Parliament passes something, the people will massively endorse it for the reasons I gave at 1034. Then we have a clear line under this.
It also needs to added in debate on Friday I heard an MP say “can’t support this as it means {such and such} forever. That’s the sort of MP who needs to be deselected. Forever doesn’t come into it, that’s for the future to choose not us, end up in the Euro or proper pirate island, the only question right now is draw line under crisis and move on from this.
And argue with me at your peril, because what I have described here is exactly what is going to happen, complete with the comfortable yes win.
Your prognosticatory track record is thus far 0%.
You think asking the electorate “do you wish to prolong this shit or move onto tackling housing crisis etc” doesn’t resolve this with a clear answer, you carry on there in deluded corner.
You are suggesting that they'll choose the "prolong this shit" answer.
Posted at 1034. Confirmatory y/n gets public backing for reason I described. No good for PV or remainiacs or ERG but they would be buried in such a ref. Like in 75. What I intended when I began writing the post is warning Isam and others what is a ref? Truth is people think what they choose to think when they hear the word, but it could take all sorts of crafted forms
Virtually no-one "wants" a referendum (revoke and no deal are apparently more popular) but, of course, to avoid revoke or no deal it seems like the only way out, especially as a GE is apparently off the agenda....but you would need two referendum options that would give a clear outcome, this uncertainty can't continue.
I disagree you need two ref options on the paper. That’s the central thrust of my argument. Parliament passes something, the people will massively endorse it for the reasons I gave at 1034. Then we have a clear line under this.
It also needs to added in debate on Friday I heard an MP say “can’t support this as it means {such and such} forever. That’s the sort of MP who needs to be deselected. Forever doesn’t come into it, that’s for the future to choose not us, end up in the Euro or proper pirate island, the only question right now is draw line under crisis and move on from this.
And argue with me at your peril, because what I have described here is exactly what is going to happen, complete with the comfortable yes win.
Your prognosticatory track record is thus far 0%.
You think asking the electorate “do you wish to prolong this shit or move onto tackling housing crisis etc” doesn’t resolve this with a clear answer, you carry on there in deluded corner.
You are suggesting that they'll choose the "prolong this shit" answer.
Posted at 1034. Confirmatory y/n gets public backing for reason I described. No good for PV or remainiacs or ERG but they would be buried in such a ref. Like in 75. What I intended when I began writing the post is warning Isam and others what is a ref? Truth is people think what they choose to think when they hear the word, but it could take all sorts of crafted forms
Virtually no-one "wants" a referendum (revoke and no deal are apparently more popular) but, of course, to avoid revoke or no deal it seems like the only way out, especially as a GE is apparently off the agenda....but you would need two referendum options that would give a clear outcome, this uncertainty can't continue.
I disagree you need two ref options on the paper. That’s the central thrust of my argument. Parliament passes something, the people will massively endorse it for the reasons I gave at 1034. Then we have a clear line under this.
It also needs to added in debate on Friday I heard an MP say “can’t support this as it means {such and such} forever. That’s the sort of MP who needs to be deselected. Forever doesn’t come into it, that’s for the future to choose not us, end up in the Euro or proper pirate island, the only question right now is draw line under crisis and move on from this.
What I proposed neatly does that.
But it wont be agreed.
Which part won’t Parliament passing something or the voters not massively backing it?
How about this? May and corbyn agree to promote CU and the WA with parliament oversight/approval of the negotiation. Victory for parliament but keeps May and the Tories in place as a GE would reset things? Will they fudge something like that?
There's very little time to pass any deal now, and the EU is going to come under multiple pressures if leaders agree to extend for a deal which is not guaranteed to pass.
The EU just went the WA passed, they couldn't give a crap what we are arguing about after that. The WA could pass if corbyn and may whip it attached to the agreed IV winner - cu, common market 2 being likely one or the other. Referendum will quietly disappear
They do, but the public and internal pressure in the EU to avoid extensions not guaranteed to produce any procedural result is also becoming enormous now. They would have to have some form of cast-iron public commitment to whipping for a deal by May and Corbyn before the end of Friday, and that looks notably unlikely to me.
Everything seems to be heading towards a long extension, and there is a noticeably different tone coming from ministers last night and this morning.
However, this probably still needs either a referendum or an election to fix it.
I think the long extension is almost nailed on. Even Cabinet members are talking about it today.
There will probably be a PV vote on Monday, which might pass. In which case that provides the justification for an extension. Otherwise the alternative looks like a GE.
If there's a GE we don't need to identify a deal now. If there's a PV then Parliament will probably identify the WA+CU option as the preferred, or just possibly WA+CM2
And argue with me at your peril, because what I have described here is exactly what is going to happen, complete with the comfortable yes win.
Your prognosticatory track record is thus far 0%.
You think asking the electorate “do you wish to prolong this shit or move onto tackling housing crisis etc” doesn’t resolve this with a clear answer, you carry on there in deluded corner.
You are suggesting that they'll choose the "prolong this shit" answer.
Posted at 1034. Confirmatory y/n gets public backing for reason I described. No good for PV or remainiacs or ERG but they would be buried in such a ref. Like in 75. What I intended when I began writing the post is warning Isam and others what is a ref? Truth is people think what they choose to think when they hear the word, but it could take all sorts of crafted forms
Virtually no-one "wants" a referendum (revoke and no deal are apparently more popular) but, of course, to avoid revoke or no deal it seems like the only way out, especially as a GE is apparently off the agenda....but you would need two referendum options that would give a clear outcome, this uncertainty can't continue.
I disagree you need two ref options on the paper. That’s the central thrust of my argument. Parliament passes something, the people will massively endorse it for the reasons I gave at 1034. Then we have a clear line under this.
It also needs to added in debate on Friday I heard an MP say “can’t support this as it means {such and such} forever. That’s the sort of MP who needs to be deselected. Forever doesn’t come into it, that’s for the future to choose not us, end up in the Euro or proper pirate island, the only question right now is draw line under crisis and move on from this.
What I proposed neatly does that.
But it wont be agreed.
Which part won’t Parliament passing something or the voters not massively backing it?
Can't see Labour (or any of the opposition parties) ever agreeing to that, won't therefore get through HoC.
The EU said last week in the event of No Deal there would be no mini/sectoral deals.
Pretty bold by them considering we hold all the cards.
They are lying. At this point to force outcome they say that. But at point it becomes No Deal both parties look for every win win scenario they can. Simples. EU are trying to distract from fact so much is in place to manage no deal with the lie they will be bloody minded not to use those things in event of no deal happening. And they sound unconvincing and pathetic every time they say that
I've decided that the solution to Brexit is simple. All you need to do is work out what is the worst possible outcome for the UK and then work on the basis that is what the incompetent twats that we call MPs will ultimately choose.
The worst outcome, by a distance, is a long period of extension where we continue with current levels of uncertainty, discourage international investment, continue to pay into the pot, paralyse our politics, divide our country ever more deeply about possible second referendums etc etc. Its much worse than the deal, deal +CU, no deal, revoke, pretty much anything less insane.
So that is what they will go for.
Matt (the cartoonist) got to this solution yesterday.
Though you have helpfully filled in some of the details.
ON topic (slightly) the question is what makes populists popular?
Essentially, it's saying the things people want to hear - in that respect, our biggest populist by some way is Boris Johnson. He tailors whatever he says to the audience to whom he is speaking. They love it and they love him because he articulates what they themselves want to articulate but don't feel empowered or enabled so to do.
A populist has no problem telling two different audiences two different things and the coherence is there is always someone or something else to blame. Crudely - "you can't make profits, it's those greedy workers demanding too much money" is also "you can't afford to make ends meet, it's those greedy capitalists making too much money from you". Two audiences, two different messages and yet the same message.
Populism flourishes when there are actual societal problems - when the existing economic model isn't working for the many and when, as a result, the many feel no one represents them and no one listens to them. For those scared of change, the populist tells you what you want to hear. If you want hope, the populist will dish it out by the bucketful but it's not the Obama-type message of hope, this is the negative hope - "elect me, I'll sort out those capitalists/workers/immigrants (delete as appropriate)".
This is the hope tainted with violence and fear where change comes from a beating or two or a repressive new law.
For all the efforts of those on here and elsewhere who defend capitalism to the hilt, the fact is the current economic model isn't working for many people who find themselves trapped in low-paying and let's be honest, soul destroying employment at the bottom end of the service sector. Some on here rejoice at the numbers in work but what that means is never properly discussed. The people I see on the tube at 7am aren't relishing in the joys of capitalism, they are surviving. We must do better.
Hard to see how with current political donkeys, needs major change.
And argue with me at your peril, because what I have described here is exactly what is going to happen, complete with the comfortable yes win.
Your prognosticatory track record is thus far 0%.
You think asking the electorate “do you wish to prolong this shit or move onto tackling housing crisis etc” doesn’t resolve this with a clear answer, you carry on there in deluded corner.
You are suggesting that they'll choose the "prolong this shit" answer.
Posted at 1034. Confirmatory y/n gets public backing for reason I described. No good for PV or remainiacs or ERG but they would be buried in such a ref. Like in 75. What I intended when I began writing the post is warning Isam and others what is a ref? Truth is people think what they choose to think when they hear the word, but it could take all sorts of crafted forms
Virtually no-one "wants" a referendum (revoke and no deal are apparently more popular) but, of course, to avoid revoke or no deal it seems like the only way out, especially as a GE is apparently off the agenda....but you would need two referendum options that would give a clear outcome, this uncertainty can't continue.
I disagree you need two ref options on the paper. That’s the central thrust of my argument. Parliament passes something, the people will massively endorse it for the reasons I gave at 1034. Then we have a clear line under this.
It also needs to added in debate on Friday I heard an MP say “can’t support this as it means {such and such} forever. That’s the sort of MP who needs to be deselected. Forever doesn’t come into it, that’s for the future to choose not us, end up in the Euro or proper pirate island, the only question right now is draw line under crisis and move on from this.
What I proposed neatly does that.
But it wont be agreed.
Which part won’t Parliament passing something or the voters not massively backing it?
Can't see Labour (or any of the opposition parties) ever agreeing to that, won't therefore get through HoC.
It’s a ref. Not a remain ref. But a ref. Therefore a compromise that still achieves labour conference policy. The redreamers and pv fundamentalists will be marginalised as will the ERG. It gets through with a majority of about 150 to 200 I think.
Everything seems to be heading towards a long extension, and there is a noticeably different tone coming from ministers last night and this morning.
However, this probably still needs either a referendum or an election to fix it.
I think the long extension is almost nailed on. Even Cabinet members are talking about it today.
There will probably be a PV vote on Monday, which might pass. In which case that provides the justification for an extension. Otherwise the alternative looks like a GE.
If there's a GE we don't need to identify a deal now. If there's a PV then Parliament will probably identify the WA+CU option as the preferred, or just possibly WA+CM2
The Euro elections will be fun.
I just need to work out which is the worst bunch of lunatics to vote for.
And argue with me at your peril, because what I have described here is exactly what is going to happen, complete with the comfortable yes win.
Your prognosticatory track record is thus far 0%.
You think asking the electorate “do you wish to prolong this shit or move onto tackling housing crisis etc” doesn’t resolve this with a clear answer, you carry on there in deluded corner.
You are suggesting that they'll choose the "prolong this shit" answer.
Posted at 1034. Confirmatory y/n gets public backing for reason I described. No good for PV or remainiacs or ERG but they would be buried in such a ref. Like in 75. What I intended when I began writing the post is warning Isam and others what is a ref? Truth is people think what they choose to think when they hear the word, but it could take all sorts of crafted forms
Virtually no-one "wants" a referendum (revoke and no deal are apparently more popular) but, of course, to avoid revoke or no deal it seems like the only way out, especially as a GE is apparently off the agenda....but you would need two referendum options that would give a clear outcome, this uncertainty can't continue.
I disagree you need two ref options on the paper. That’s the central thrust of my argument. Parliament passes something, the people will massively endorse it for the reasons I gave at 1034. Then we have a clear line under this.
It also needs to added in debate on Friday I heard an MP say “can’t support this as it means {such and such} forever. That’s the sort of MP who needs to be deselected. Forever doesn’t come into it, that’s for the future to choose not us, end up in the Euro or proper pirate island, the only question right now is draw line under crisis and move on from this.
What I proposed neatly does that.
But it wont be agreed.
Which part won’t Parliament passing something or the voters not massively backing it?
It won't pass because it is foolish and dumb. A referendum that doesn't resolve things isn't going to be agreed, period. And a referedum that unites hard Brexiters and hard remainers - the two most motivated groups - in campaigning against a government deal would be an obvious disaster waiting to happen.
The EU said last week in the event of No Deal there would be no mini/sectoral deals.
Pretty bold by them considering we hold all the cards.
They are lying. At this point to force outcome they say that. But at point it becomes No Deal both parties look for every win win scenario they can. Simples. EU are trying to distract from fact so much is in place to manage no deal with the lie they will be bloody minded not to use those things in event of no deal happening. And they sound unconvincing and pathetic every time they say that
It needs to be added EU have perfectly workable answer to irish border honouring GF in no deal. They already have a very workable GF respecting plan to do nothing in the first instance of a no deal and in time add checks well away from the border. Rather than stumped by it they are shoring up plans this week to make sure that end is watertight and they are all on message.
ON topic (slightly) the question is what makes populists popular?
Essentially, it's saying the things people want to hear - in that respect, our biggest populist by some way is Boris Johnson. He tailors whatever he says to the audience to whom he is speaking. They love it and they love him because he articulates what they themselves want to articulate but don't feel empowered or enabled so to do.
A populist has no problem telling two different audiences two different things and the coherence is there is always someone or something else to blame. Crudely - "you can't make profits, it's those greedy workers demanding too much money" is also "you can't afford to make ends meet, it's those greedy capitalists making too much money from you". Two audiences, two different messages and yet the same message.
Populism flourishes when there are actual societal problems - when the existing economic model isn't working for the many and when, as a result, the many feel no one represents them and no one listens to them. For those scared of change, the populist tells you what you want to hear. If you want hope, the populist will dish it out by the bucketful but it's not the Obama-type message of hope, this is the negative hope - "elect me, I'll sort out those capitalists/workers/immigrants (delete as appropriate)".
This is the hope tainted with violence and fear where change comes from a beating or two or a repressive new law.
For all the efforts of those on here and elsewhere who defend capitalism to the hilt, the fact is the current economic model isn't working for many people who find themselves trapped in low-paying and let's be honest, soul destroying employment at the bottom end of the service sector. Some on here rejoice at the numbers in work but what that means is never properly discussed. The people I see on the tube at 7am aren't relishing in the joys of capitalism, they are surviving. We must do better.
Hard to see how with current political donkeys, needs major change.
Personally I would start with the voting system, but appreciate that is like wishing for a unicorn.
And argue with me at your peril, because what I have described here is exactly what is going to happen, complete with the comfortable yes win.
It also needs to added in debate on Friday I heard an MP say “can’t support this as it means {such and such} forever. That’s the sort of MP who needs to be deselected. Forever doesn’t come into it, that’s for the future to choose not us, end up in the Euro or proper pirate island, the only question right now is draw line under crisis and move on from this.
What I proposed neatly does that.
But it wont be agreed.
Which part won’t Parliament passing something or the voters not massively backing it?
Can't see Labour (or any of the opposition parties) ever agreeing to that, won't therefore get through HoC.
It’s a ref. Not a remain ref. But a ref. Therefore a compromise that still achieves labour conference policy. The redreamers and pv fundamentalists will be marginalised as will the ERG. It gets through with a majority of about 150 to 200 I think.
Hmmm - I wouldn't see that being accepted as a referendum from a Labour perspective as MPs / members / voters will likely see it as "weasel wording" to get TM's deal through (and a kop out from Corbyn - which kills him personally). It also makes Labour "co-own" Brexit, which I'm not sure they would want.
Mr. Divvie, do you object to Aussies calling us poms?
*sighs*
I do wonder if you're being contrary just for the sake of it.
Couldn't give a feck. However I imagine you do on the 'gammon is racist' metric, since it refers 'to the fact that the harsh Australian sun could turn British immigrants' skin pomegranate red'.
It's a good job then that God spares the Scots much sight of the sun....
Thankfully the ever inventive English find other contexts to think up 'light-hearted mockery'.
Porridge w*g is my particular favourite, though Haggistani is one I was recently tickled by.
Nothing will ever top the 'Waffen Yes Yes' and the 'Yestapo.'
To quote the late Bob Monkhouse, they're not laughing now.
Everything seems to be heading towards a long extension, and there is a noticeably different tone coming from ministers last night and this morning.
However, this probably still needs either a referendum or an election to fix it.
I think the long extension is almost nailed on. Even Cabinet members are talking about it today.
There will probably be a PV vote on Monday, which might pass. In which case that provides the justification for an extension. Otherwise the alternative looks like a GE.
If there's a GE we don't need to identify a deal now. If there's a PV then Parliament will probably identify the WA+CU option as the preferred, or just possibly WA+CM2
It's likely May will be forced out by the Tories as soon as a long extension has been agreed, whether or not the Commons has voted for a PV. If a no-dealer is elected Tory leader that could well lead to a VONC and a general election, which would happen before any PV.
The EU said last week in the event of No Deal there would be no mini/sectoral deals.
Pretty bold by them considering we hold all the cards.
They are lying. At this point to force outcome they say that. But at point it becomes No Deal both parties look for every win win scenario they can. Simples. EU are trying to distract from fact so much is in place to manage no deal with the lie they will be bloody minded not to use those things in event of no deal happening. And they sound unconvincing and pathetic every time they say that
It needs to be added EU have perfectly workable answer to irish border honouring GF in no deal. They already have a very workable GF respecting plan to do nothing in the first instance of a no deal and in time add checks well away from the border. Rather than stumped by it they are shoring up plans this week to make sure that end is watertight and they are all on message.
If Theresa May agrees to a second referendum she will have successfully destroyed the Conservative Party. It will simply implode. I don't know if Philip Hammond was authorised by May to suggest second referendum, but would not surprise me if he was. FWIW According to Guido a government source has told him nothing is off the table except revoke.
The sense of utter betrayal this will create in the country will divide this nation forevermore, and resentment for the EU will grow and grow
And if we Remain, either because we revoke or because Brexit is in name only, then a large chunk of this country will lay every one of our country's ills at the failure of politicians to deliver a "proppa Brexit".....
I am not keen on another referendum for various reasons, but why are Leave supporters so terrified of one? Surely, they have the support of the will-o-the-people, and that is an absolute?
Because it has been promoted by people who wish to overturn the result
Their transparent desire to find an excuse to ignore the democratically expressed will of a majority of voters is why it is opposed
The Lords Tory Brexit nutjobs are complete hypocrites . They always big up the Commons taking precedence but now have decided that they’ll try and over rule them .
what I have described here is exactly what is going to happen, complete with the comfortable yes win.
Your
You think asking the electorate “do you wish to prolong this shit or move onto tackling housing crisis etc” doesn’t resolve this with a clear answer, you carry on there in deluded corner.
Posted at 1034. Confirmatory y/n gets public backing for reason I described. No good for PV or remainiacs or ERG but they would be buried in such a ref. Like in 75. What I intended when I began writing the post is warning Isam and others what is a ref? Truth is people think what they choose to think when they hear the word, but it could take all sorts of crafted forms
Virtually no-one "wants" a referendum
I disagree you need two ref options on the paper. That’s the central thrust of my argument. Parliament passes something, the people will massively endorse it for the reasons I gave at 1034. Then we have a clear line under this.
It also needs to added in debate on Friday I heard an MP say “can’t support this as it means {such and such} forever. That’s the sort of MP who needs to be deselected. Forever doesn’t come into it, that’s for the future to choose not us, end up in the Euro or proper pirate island, the only question right now is draw line under crisis and move on from this.
What I proposed neatly does that.
But it wont be agreed.
Which part won’t Parliament passing something or the voters not massively backing it?
It won't pass because it is foolish and dumb. A referendum that doesn't resolve things isn't going to be agreed, period. And a referedum that unites hard Brexiters and hard remainers - the two most motivated groups - in campaigning against a government deal would be an obvious disaster waiting to happen.
Ha! You are sounding rattled 🙃
It does draw a line under crisis and move us on for many years because it gets big win in both parlaiment and the country, uniting, yes, but marginalising the two groups of extremists you mentioned.
The problem for the pv and remains is they think they are in stronger position than they are. The fact is there isnt, hasn’t been, will not be a majority in this remainery commons to pass their type of ref. There will be a brexit of sorts and they need to surrender to that.
The EU said last week in the event of No Deal there would be no mini/sectoral deals.
Pretty bold by them considering we hold all the cards.
It’s not flights to/from the EU that are the problem. According to the article nothing has yet been done to replace the EU’s air services agreements with the US, Canada and Australia.
If we are not to have "no deal" then some sort of deal must be agreed by Parliament and presented to the EU. Requesting an extension without a clear goal will rightly be rebuffed by Brussels. I cannot see that May will next week be in a position to present Brussels with sufficient reason for an extension to allay their fears about our participation in the European elections. Their main objective now is to preserve the coherence of their Project. I think their response will be to politely tell us to go hang.
I'd rather MPs just revoked than put us through a second referendum. If they can't implement the first one that gave them an answer they didn't want don't ask me again. just do it.
I am from the Remain side of the argument. I think leaving the EU is an act of monumental stupidity. In fact I can think of only one thing in our recent history to match it in the stupidity stakes and that was the decision to allow the people to choose it in a referendum.
Nevertheless I agree with you. It was a clear win for Leave and it is now up to the politicians to make the best of it. If they can't agree to leave in an orderly fashion, and they are not prepared to leave in a disorderly fashion, then they should take it on the chin and cancel.
On topic: This excellent article by Cyclefree and the responses to it (especially by Labour supporters) are an object lesson in how partisanship distorts understanding. The header very carefully and cogently defines five ways in which Trump and Corbyn are similar. And what's the response (even from Nick P)? To completely ignore the five points Ms Cyclefree makes, and instead to say 'Oh no, Corbyn's not like Trump because of this other difference'.
Well, yes. There are obvious big differences between the two. But the header is spot-on on the disturbing similarities.
I see the Conservatives have already won 15 out 39 seats on Fenland council. 12 are returned unopposed, 3 guaranteed election, due to a shortage of opponents.
So far, I've seen 61 Conservative returned unopposed, or guaranteed election.
If we are not to have "no deal" then some sort of deal must be agreed by Parliament and presented to the EU. Requesting an extension without a clear goal will rightly be rebuffed by Brussels. I cannot see that May will next week be in a position to present Brussels with sufficient reason for an extension to allay their fears about our participation in the European elections. Their main objective now is to preserve the coherence of their Project. I think their response will be to politely tell us to go hang.
p.s. apologies for the split infinitive.
There's nothing wrong with split infinitives. Getting hung up on that is to grievously misunderstand what language is all about.
If we are not to have "no deal" then some sort of deal must be agreed by Parliament and presented to the EU. Requesting an extension without a clear goal will rightly be rebuffed by Brussels. I cannot see that May will next week be in a position to present Brussels with sufficient reason for an extension to allay their fears about our participation in the European elections. Their main objective now is to preserve the coherence of their Project. I think their response will be to politely tell us to go hang.
p.s. apologies for the split infinitive.
The EU will deem the ongoing inter-party talks to be sufficient reason for an extension I think. May might also offer her own resignation, if she doesn't I think it will be forced on her by the Tories in very short order. The EU will insist on the UK fighting EP elections and also some kind of undertaking about not being disruptive to EU business. They will reserve the right to push the UK into a no deal exit if we don't behave.
And so the fate of the UK will be completely in the hands of the EU. The exact opposite of the position that the referendum was supposed to bring about.
I'd rather MPs just revoked than put us through a second referendum. If they can't implement the first one that gave them an answer they didn't want don't ask me again. just do it.
I am from the Remain side of the argument. I think leaving the EU is an act of monumental stupidity. In fact I can think of only one thing in our recent history to match it in the stupidity stakes and that was the decision to allow the people to choose it in a referendum.
Nevertheless I agree with you. It was a clear win for Leave and it is now up to the politicians to make the best of it. If they can't agree to leave in an orderly fashion, and they are not prepared to leave in a disorderly fashion, then they should take it on the chin and cancel.
Okay let’s slap remain about so they come to their senses.
Is the best deal the current one therefore brexit no longer has the country behind it, knowing now what it didn’t know then?
Disputable on the grounds of both patronising and not listening to the electorate, you are talking about economics not necessarily other factors such as
“Come out the SM and reduce immigration will make this country poorer, so you don’t want to do that do You” “I have already told you to do just that, just get on and fucking do It, we will be happier UK without the immigration regardless of the economics”.
If the world is, and the way out of this, is how you remainers see it, this elephant doesn’t get shot.
I'd rather MPs just revoked than put us through a second referendum. If they can't implement the first one that gave them an answer they didn't want don't ask me again. just do it.
I am from the Remain side of the argument. I think leaving the EU is an act of monumental stupidity. In fact I can think of only one thing in our recent history to match it in the stupidity stakes and that was the decision to allow the people to choose it in a referendum.
Nevertheless I agree with you. It was a clear win for Leave and it is now up to the politicians to make the best of it. If they can't agree to leave in an orderly fashion, and they are not prepared to leave in a disorderly fashion, then they should take it on the chin and cancel.
I said last night: it needs a Fairy Godmother to appear, Revoke and vanish again. A meteor hitting the Palace of Westminster when no-one's there and burning the HoC chamber to the ground is the best we could hope for, and the odds are vanishingly small.
It's likely May will be forced out by the Tories as soon as a long extension has been agreed, whether or not the Commons has voted for a PV. If a no-dealer is elected Tory leader that could well lead to a VONC and a general election, which would happen before any PV.
Yes, I cannot see how this parliament can hold together for the time it would take to deliver REF2. Which PM? What government? Backed by who?
For me, REF2 comes (if it comes) AFTER a pre Brexit GE, with Labour offering it and winning.
I'd rather MPs just revoked than put us through a second referendum. If they can't implement the first one that gave them an answer they didn't want don't ask me again. just do it.
I am from the Remain side of the argument. I think leaving the EU is an act of monumental stupidity. In fact I can think of only one thing in our recent history to match it in the stupidity stakes and that was the decision to allow the people to choose it in a referendum.
Nevertheless I agree with you. It was a clear win for Leave and it is now up to the politicians to make the best of it. If they can't agree to leave in an orderly fashion, and they are not prepared to leave in a disorderly fashion, then they should take it on the chin and cancel.
The ideal vote on monday should be
TM deal v revoke
A second referendum is needed to answer that question because parliament is still frozen as a result of the 2016 vote. Ironically a referendum between ratifying the withdrawal agreement and revocation would have the effect of restoring normal representative democracy.
I see the Conservatives have already won 15 out 39 seats on Fenland council. 12 are returned unopposed, 3 guaranteed election, due to a shortage of opponents.
So far, I've seen 61 Conservative returned unopposed, or guaranteed election.
OT, I think the biggest similarity between Trump and Corbyn is the word that pops into my head each time I see either of them. Interestingly, you can make the word using two letters from Trump's name and two from Corbyn's.
If we are not to have "no deal" then some sort of deal must be agreed by Parliament and presented to the EU. Requesting an extension without a clear goal will rightly be rebuffed by Brussels. I cannot see that May will next week be in a position to present Brussels with sufficient reason for an extension to allay their fears about our participation in the European elections. Their main objective now is to preserve the coherence of their Project. I think their response will be to politely tell us to go hang.
p.s. apologies for the split infinitive.
The EU will deem the ongoing inter-party talks to be sufficient reason for an extension I think. May might also offer her own resignation, if she doesn't I think it will be forced on her by the Tories in very short order. The EU will insist on the UK fighting EP elections and also some kind of undertaking about not being disruptive to EU business. They will reserve the right to push the UK into a no deal exit if we don't behave.
And so the fate of the UK will be completely in the hands of the EU. The exact opposite of the position that the referendum was supposed to bring about.
There are several holes in there. The EU have stated as infinitum an extension requires a reason and talking between ourselves is not one of them. TM is not going to resign until either we leave on the 22nd May or we revoke.
If we seek an extension beyond the 22nd May it is a given we take part in the EU elections. They will not push us into no deal if they are seen to be responsible.
As I said earlier, the EU demands the WDA passes on monday for an extension to be considered so TM should put just two options to the HOC on monday.
OT, I think the biggest similarity between Trump and Corbyn is the word that pops into my head each time I see either of them. Interestingly, you can make the word using two letters from Trump's name and two from Corbyn's.
I don’t see why Remainers have any responsibility to deal with Leaver impossibilism. If Leavers cannot work out what they want it is not for Remainers to decide for them. If Leavers have failed in their task, and they have, it is open to Remainers now to offer their own ideas as to the best way forward.
It won't pass because it is foolish and dumb. A referendum that doesn't resolve things isn't going to be agreed, period. And a referedum that unites hard Brexiters and hard remainers - the two most motivated groups - in campaigning against a government deal would be an obvious disaster waiting to happen.
But the same point applies to DEAL v REMAIN. Those same 2 most motivated groups would be united in campaigning against the Deal.
Same flaw. Worse, in fact, since at least if it were DEAL vs IMPASSE the Deal would have half a chance.
In essence I agree with you on "dumb and foolish" but unfortunately that is an accurate description of ALL possible formulations for REF2.
I'd rather MPs just revoked than put us through a second referendum. If they can't implement the first one that gave them an answer they didn't want don't ask me again. just do it.
I am from the Remain side of the argument. I think leaving the EU is an act of monumental stupidity. In fact I can think of only one thing in our recent history to match it in the stupidity stakes and that was the decision to allow the people to choose it in a referendum.
Nevertheless I agree with you. It was a clear win for Leave and it is now up to the politicians to make the best of it. If they can't agree to leave in an orderly fashion, and they are not prepared to leave in a disorderly fashion, then they should take it on the chin and cancel.
The ideal vote on monday should be TM deal v revoke
The problem here is that a lot of people want no deal. It seems to be something close to 50%. However much they are warned, they persist in believing it is the right thing to do. It is what they have been promised again and again, mostly by the conservative party. It seems to me that revoking would do unthinkable harm not just to the politicians and the conservative party, but also the entire system of representative democracy, and the labour party if they vote for it. A better option (but by no means perfect) is to simply admit that the deal cannot work, and propose an extension and second referendum, but unless no deal is an option in such a referendum, the sense of betrayal will prevail.
I see the Conservatives have already won 15 out 39 seats on Fenland council. 12 are returned unopposed, 3 guaranteed election, due to a shortage of opponents.
So far, I've seen 61 Conservative returned unopposed, or guaranteed election.
76 Conservatives, 6 Lib Dems, 2 Labour.
Of the 39 seats, I wonder how many of the councillors are not related?
They generally prefer the imperial system of measure to decimal, not because it is more British, but because twelve toes equals a foot.
It's likely May will be forced out by the Tories as soon as a long extension has been agreed, whether or not the Commons has voted for a PV. If a no-dealer is elected Tory leader that could well lead to a VONC and a general election, which would happen before any PV.
Yes, I cannot see how this parliament can hold together for the time it would take to deliver REF2. Which PM? What government? Backed by who?
For me, REF2 comes (if it comes) AFTER a pre Brexit GE, with Labour offering it and winning.
Yes - if there is a GE all parties apart from the Tories and perhaps the DUP will have some kind of commitment to a referendum in their manifesto, however qualified, so it's almost certain that a new parliament would contain a majority of MPs elected on a mandate for a second vote.
If we are not to have "no deal" then some sort of deal must be agreed by Parliament and presented to the EU. Requesting an extension without a clear goal will rightly be rebuffed by Brussels. I cannot see that May will next week be in a position to present Brussels with sufficient reason for an extension to allay their fears about our participation in the European elections. Their main objective now is to preserve the coherence of their Project. I think their response will be to politely tell us to go hang.
p.s. apologies for the split infinitive.
The EU will deem the ongoing inter-party talks to be sufficient reason for an extension I think. May might also offer her own resignation, if she doesn't I think it will be forced on her by the Tories in very short order. The EU will insist on the UK fighting EP elections and also some kind of undertaking about not being disruptive to EU business. They will reserve the right to push the UK into a no deal exit if we don't behave.
And so the fate of the UK will be completely in the hands of the EU. The exact opposite of the position that the referendum was supposed to bring about.
There are several holes in there. The EU have stated as infinitum an extension requires a reason and talking between ourselves is not one of them. TM is not going to resign until either we leave on the 22nd May or we revoke.
If we seek an extension beyond the 22nd May it is a given we take part in the EU elections. They will not push us into no deal if they are seen to be responsible.
As I said earlier, the EU demands the WDA passes on monday for an extension to be considered so TM should put just two options to the HOC on monday.
I'd rather MPs just revoked than put us through a second referendum. If they can't implement the first one that gave them an answer they didn't want don't ask me again. just do it.
I am from the Remain side of the argument. I think leaving the EU is an act of monumental stupidity. In fact I can think of only one thing in our recent history to match it in the stupidity stakes and that was the decision to allow the people to choose it in a referendum.
Nevertheless I agree with you. It was a clear win for Leave and it is now up to the politicians to make the best of it. If they can't agree to leave in an orderly fashion, and they are not prepared to leave in a disorderly fashion, then they should take it on the chin and cancel.
The ideal vote on monday should be
TM deal v revoke
A second referendum is needed to answer that question because parliament is still frozen as a result of the 2016 vote. Ironically a referendum between ratifying the withdrawal agreement and revocation would have the effect of restoring normal representative democracy.
A referendum would take far too long and would be horribly divisive. Revoke and that is it
OT, I think the biggest similarity between Trump and Corbyn is the word that pops into my head each time I see either of them. Interestingly, you can make the word using two letters from Trump's name and two from Corbyn's.
I don’t see why Remainers have any responsibility to deal with Leaver impossibilism. If Leavers cannot work out what they want it is not for Remainers to decide for them. If Leavers have failed in their task, and they have, it is open to Remainers now to offer their own ideas as to the best way forward.
Sarah Vine blames "powerful cabals" for Brexit being a shambles. Nothing to do with having promised the undeliverable...
OT, I think the biggest similarity between Trump and Corbyn is the word that pops into my head each time I see either of them. Interestingly, you can make the word using two letters from Trump's name and two from Corbyn's.
Puny?
Edit: in retrospect, "porn" would have been much funnier.
I see the Conservatives have already won 15 out 39 seats on Fenland council. 12 are returned unopposed, 3 guaranteed election, due to a shortage of opponents.
So far, I've seen 61 Conservative returned unopposed, or guaranteed election.
76 Conservatives, 6 Lib Dems, 2 Labour.
Of the 39 seats, I wonder how many of the councillors are not related?
They generally prefer the imperial system of measure to decimal, not because it is more British, but because twelve toes equals a foot.
Evolution did not do us a favour by settling on five digits per limb. Six would have been far better.
This is yet another piece of evidence against "intelligent" design, as it would imply that the Creator did not even have a basic grasp of number theory.
I'd rather MPs just revoked than put us through a second referendum. If they can't implement the first one that gave them an answer they didn't want don't ask me again. just do it.
I am from the Remain side of the argument. I think leaving the EU is an act of monumental stupidity. In fact I can think of only one thing in our recent history to match it in the stupidity stakes and that was the decision to allow the people to choose it in a referendum.
Nevertheless I agree with you. It was a clear win for Leave and it is now up to the politicians to make the best of it. If they can't agree to leave in an orderly fashion, and they are not prepared to leave in a disorderly fashion, then they should take it on the chin and cancel.
The ideal vote on monday should be TM deal v revoke
The problem here is that a lot of people want no deal. It seems to be something close to 50%. However much they are warned, they persist in believing it is the right thing to do. It is what they have been promised again and again, mostly by the conservative party. It seems to me that revoking would do unthinkable harm not just to the politicians and the conservative party, but also the entire system of representative democracy, and the labour party if they vote for it. A better option (but by no means perfect) is to simply admit that the deal cannot work, and propose an extension and second referendum, but unless no deal is an option in such a referendum, the sense of betrayal will prevail.
I do accept your comments and that is why I used the word ideal - maybe I should have said to get it over with
Mr. Divvie, do you object to Aussies calling us poms?
*sighs*
I do wonder if you're being contrary just for the sake of it.
Couldn't give a feck. However I imagine you do on the 'gammon is racist' metric, since it refers 'to the fact that the harsh Australian sun could turn British immigrants' skin pomegranate red'.
I grew up in the 90s in Australia and was always called a 'Pom' or 'Pommie bastard' and I've never heard that etymology before.
I always heard it referred traditionally to "Prisoner Of Mother England"
I see the Conservatives have already won 15 out 39 seats on Fenland council. 12 are returned unopposed, 3 guaranteed election, due to a shortage of opponents.
So far, I've seen 61 Conservative returned unopposed, or guaranteed election.
76 Conservatives, 6 Lib Dems, 2 Labour.
Of the 39 seats, I wonder how many of the councillors are not related?
They generally prefer the imperial system of measure to decimal, not because it is more British, but because twelve toes equals a foot.
Evolution did not do us a favour by settling on five digits per limb. Six would have been far better.
This is yet another piece of evidence against "intelligent" design, as it would imply that the Creator did not even have a basic grasp of number theory.
Perhaps He wanted to make us more intelligent by giving us a bit of an arithmetic challenge?
If we are not to have "no deal" then some sort of deal must be agreed by Parliament and presented to the EU. Requesting an extension without a clear goal will rightly be rebuffed by Brussels. I cannot see that May will next week be in a position to present Brussels with sufficient reason for an extension to allay their fears about our participation in the European elections. Their main objective now is to preserve the coherence of their Project. I think their response will be to politely tell us to go hang.
p.s. apologies for the split infinitive.
The EU will deem the ongoing inter-party talks to be sufficient reason for an extension I think. May might also offer her own resignation, if she doesn't I think it will be forced on her by the Tories in very short order. The EU will insist on the UK fighting EP elections and also some kind of undertaking about not being disruptive to EU business. They will reserve the right to push the UK into a no deal exit if we don't behave.
And so the fate of the UK will be completely in the hands of the EU. The exact opposite of the position that the referendum was supposed to bring about.
There are several holes in there. The EU have stated as infinitum an extension requires a reason and talking between ourselves is not one of them. TM is not going to resign until either we leave on the 22nd May or we revoke.
If we seek an extension beyond the 22nd May it is a given we take part in the EU elections. They will not push us into no deal if they are seen to be responsible.
As I said earlier, the EU demands the WDA passes on monday for an extension to be considered so TM should put just two options to the HOC on monday.
TM deal or revoke
The question cannot be framed in that way. The HoC votes for or against a proposal, it cannot be forced into a choice between two proposals, neither of which command a majority. Theoretically it could pass a procedural motion to give itself a forced choice but such a motion would not be carried.
The EU said last week in the event of No Deal there would be no mini/sectoral deals.
Pretty bold by them considering we hold all the cards.
The EU have already announced their plans to cover flights, freight transport and various other issues in the event of a no deal. These were announced and officially adopted by the Commission last autumn. So unless they have explicitly reversed those decisions then the Guardian is writing Bullshit.
Mr. Divvie, do you object to Aussies calling us poms?
*sighs*
I do wonder if you're being contrary just for the sake of it.
Couldn't give a feck. However I imagine you do on the 'gammon is racist' metric, since it refers 'to the fact that the harsh Australian sun could turn British immigrants' skin pomegranate red'.
I grew up in the 90s in Australia and was always called a 'Pom' or 'Pommie bastard' and I've never heard that etymology before.
I always heard it referred traditionally to "Prisoner Of Mother England"
I understood that it was a contraction/corruption of "Prisoner of Her Majesty in Exile" (POHMIE)
If we are not to have "no deal" then some sort of deal must be agreed by Parliament and presented to the EU. Requesting an extension without a clear goal will rightly be rebuffed by Brussels. I cannot see that May will next week be in a position to present Brussels with sufficient reason for an extension to allay their fears about our participation in the European elections. Their main objective now is to preserve the coherence of their Project. I think their response will be to politely tell us to go hang.
p.s. apologies for the split infinitive.
The EU will deem the ongoing inter-party talks to be sufficient reason for an extension I think. May might also offer her own resignation, if she doesn't I think it will be forced on her by the Tories in very short order. The EU will insist on the UK fighting EP elections and also some kind of undertaking about not being disruptive to EU business. They will reserve the right to push the UK into a no deal exit if we don't behave.
And so the fate of the UK will be completely in the hands of the EU. The exact opposite of the position that the referendum was supposed to bring about.
There are several holes in there. The EU have stated as infinitum an extension requires a reason and talking between ourselves is not one of them. TM is not going to resign until either we leave on the 22nd May or we revoke.
If we seek an extension beyond the 22nd May it is a given we take part in the EU elections. They will not push us into no deal if they are seen to be responsible.
As I said earlier, the EU demands the WDA passes on monday for an extension to be considered so TM should put just two options to the HOC on monday.
TM deal or revoke
The question cannot be framed in that way. The HoC votes for or against a proposal, it cannot be forced into a choice between two proposals, neither of which command a majority. Theoretically it could pass a procedural motion to give itself a forced choice but such a motion would not be carried.
I'd rather MPs just revoked than put us through a second referendum. If they can't implement the first one that gave them an answer they didn't want don't ask me again. just do it.
I am from the Remain side of the argument. I think leaving the EU is an act of monumental stupidity. In fact I can think of only one thing in our recent history to match it in the stupidity stakes and that was the decision to allow the people to choose it in a referendum.
Nevertheless I agree with you. It was a clear win for Leave and it is now up to the politicians to make the best of it. If they can't agree to leave in an orderly fashion, and they are not prepared to leave in a disorderly fashion, then they should take it on the chin and cancel.
The ideal vote on monday should be TM deal v revoke
The problem here is that a lot of people want no deal. It seems to be something close to 50%. However much they are warned, they persist in believing it is the right thing to do. It is what they have been promised again and again, mostly by the conservative party. It seems to me that revoking would do unthinkable harm not just to the politicians and the conservative party, but also the entire system of representative democracy, and the labour party if they vote for it. A better option (but by no means perfect) is to simply admit that the deal cannot work, and propose an extension and second referendum, but unless no deal is an option in such a referendum, the sense of betrayal will prevail.
If so, one wonders why there are 10x more petition signatures for cancelling it
Revoke 6,000,000 No Deal 600,000
Are lots of ultra-leave voters unable to sign a petition due to not having a PC? Or are there fewer people than we're told who are really committed to economic chaos? I think that we should be told the details.
The EU said last week in the event of No Deal there would be no mini/sectoral deals.
Pretty bold by them considering we hold all the cards.
The EU have already announced their plans to cover flights, freight transport and various other issues in the event of a no deal. These were announced and officially adopted by the Commission last autumn. So unless they have explicitly reversed those decisions then the Guardian is writing Bullshit.
The EU will keep stuff flowing on their end without a deal as best they can, and act in their own interests. It's not the same as minideals, and the outcomes may or may not be in our interests.
It won't pass because it is foolish and dumb. A referendum that doesn't resolve things isn't going to be agreed, period. And a referedum that unites hard Brexiters and hard remainers - the two most motivated groups - in campaigning against a government deal would be an obvious disaster waiting to happen.
But the same point applies to DEAL v REMAIN. Those same 2 most motivated groups would be united in campaigning against the Deal.
Same flaw. Worse, in fact, since at least if it were DEAL vs IMPASSE the Deal would have half a chance.
In essence I agree with you on "dumb and foolish" but unfortunately that is an accurate description of ALL possible formulations for REF2.
The key difference is that whichever of deal or remain wins resolves the matter. Which is why that is the only referendum parliament is likely to agree.
Everything seems to be heading towards a long extension, and there is a noticeably different tone coming from ministers last night and this morning.
However, this probably still needs either a referendum or an election to fix it.
I think the long extension is almost nailed on. Even Cabinet members are talking about it today.
There will probably be a PV vote on Monday, which might pass. In which case that provides the justification for an extension. Otherwise the alternative looks like a GE.
If there's a GE we don't need to identify a deal now. If there's a PV then Parliament will probably identify the WA+CU option as the preferred, or just possibly WA+CM2
The Euro elections will be fun.
I just need to work out which is the worst bunch of lunatics to vote for.
Farage's new Brexit Party will surely win the European elections comfortably and perhaps be enough to give Nationalists the largest number of seats in the European Parliament
I don’t see why Remainers have any responsibility to deal with Leaver impossibilism. If Leavers cannot work out what they want it is not for Remainers to decide for them. If Leavers have failed in their task, and they have, it is open to Remainers now to offer their own ideas as to the best way forward.
Unfortunately remainers have to deal with it - there are more of them in Parliament, so they are needed to pass relevant legislation and a large number were elected on manifestos committed to implementing the result. They did not have to put themselves up for election if they thought it was impossible
I'd rather MPs just revoked than put us through a second referendum. If they can't implement the first one that gave them an answer they didn't want don't ask me again. just do it.
I am from the Remain side of the argument. I think leaving the EU is an act of monumental stupidity. In fact I can think of only one thing in our recent history to match it in the stupidity stakes and that was the decision to allow the people to choose it in a referendum.
Nevertheless I agree with you. It was a clear win for Leave and it is now up to the politicians to make the best of it. If they can't agree to leave in an orderly fashion, and they are not prepared to leave in a disorderly fashion, then they should take it on the chin and cancel.
The ideal vote on monday should be TM deal v revoke
The problem here is that a lot of people want no deal. It seems to be something close to 50%. However much they are warned, they persist in believing it is the right thing to do. It is what they have been promised again and again, mostly by the conservative party. It seems to me that revoking would do unthinkable harm not just to the politicians and the conservative party, but also the entire system of representative democracy, and the labour party if they vote for it. A better option (but by no means perfect) is to simply admit that the deal cannot work, and propose an extension and second referendum, but unless no deal is an option in such a referendum, the sense of betrayal will prevail.
If so, one wonders why there are 10x more petition signatures for cancelling it
Revoke 6,000,000 No Deal 600,000
Are lots of ultra-leave voters unable to sign a petition due to not having a PC? Or are there fewer people than we're told who are really committed to economic chaos? I think that we should be told.
I do not think we need to be told - it is very obvious the no dealers are in a large minority
Everything seems to be heading towards a long extension, and there is a noticeably different tone coming from ministers last night and this morning.
However, this probably still needs either a referendum or an election to fix it.
I think the long extension is almost nailed on. Even Cabinet members are talking about it today.
There will probably be a PV vote on Monday, which might pass. In which case that provides the justification for an extension. Otherwise the alternative looks like a GE.
If there's a GE we don't need to identify a deal now. If there's a PV then Parliament will probably identify the WA+CU option as the preferred, or just possibly WA+CM2
The Euro elections will be fun.
I just need to work out which is the worst bunch of lunatics to vote for.
Farage's new Brexit Party will surely win the European elections comfortably and perhaps be enough to give Nationalists the largest number of seats in the European Parliament
No way I’m encouraging him.
I’d vote for someone like Lord Buckethead but, unfortunately, he’s a europhile.
The EU said last week in the event of No Deal there would be no mini/sectoral deals.
Pretty bold by them considering we hold all the cards.
The EU have already announced their plans to cover flights, freight transport and various other issues in the event of a no deal. These were announced and officially adopted by the Commission last autumn. So unless they have explicitly reversed those decisions then the Guardian is writing Bullshit.
Mr. Divvie, do you object to Aussies calling us poms?
*sighs*
I do wonder if you're being contrary just for the sake of it.
Couldn't give a feck. However I imagine you do on the 'gammon is racist' metric, since it refers 'to the fact that the harsh Australian sun could turn British immigrants' skin pomegranate red'.
I grew up in the 90s in Australia and was always called a 'Pom' or 'Pommie bastard' and I've never heard that etymology before.
I always heard it referred traditionally to "Prisoner Of Mother England"
Good afternoon everyone. Troubles come in three's don't they; operation a couple of weeks ago, now my new fibre broadband doesn't work and today I've had to have an emergency dental appointment as a tooth fell to pieces. Maybe that's it.
On the POM issue, some years ago my wife and I were in New Zealand and for various reasons we booked a coach trip. I was in my customary Guardian approved shorts and sandals and after a couple of stops one of the other passengers, an Australian, as was indeed every else on the trip. 'You a Pom, mate?' he asked. "'Yes" 'Thought you were when I heard you talk, but you can't be; you're not wearing socks with your sandals!'
The EU said last week in the event of No Deal there would be no mini/sectoral deals.
Pretty bold by them considering we hold all the cards.
The EU have already announced their plans to cover flights, freight transport and various other issues in the event of a no deal. These were announced and officially adopted by the Commission last autumn. So unless they have explicitly reversed those decisions then the Guardian is writing Bullshit.
The Guardian was correct (not that this particular point is new). Juncker reiterated the position yesterday:
The measures we and the Member States have taken will mitigate the worst impact of a “no-deal” scenario. The protection offered is real. The measures will make sure that EU and UK citizens can continue to live and work where they are at the moment. They make sure that planes can take off and land. We have adapted our financial instrument to make it possible to help fishing communities. We have identified the ways in which law enforcement cooperation can continue. We have taken steps to mitigate disruption on our financial markets.
The measures we have taken are time-limited and unilateral. They provide a cushion for key EU interests at least until the end of the year. But disruption will be inevitable for citizens, for businesses and for almost every sector.
The United Kingdom will be affected more than the European Union because there is no such thing as a “managed or negotiated no-deal” and there is no such thing as a “no-deal transition”.
And whatever happens, the United Kingdom will still be expected to address the three main separation issues.
- Citizens' rights would still need to be upheld and protected. - The United Kingdom would still have to honour its financial commitments made as a Member State. - And thirdly, a solution would still need to be found on the island of Ireland that preserves peace and the internal market. The United Kingdom must fully respect the letter and spirit of the Good Friday Agreement.
“No-deal” does not mean no commitments. And these three issues will not go away. They will be a strict condition to rebuild trust and to start talking on the way forward.
Everything seems to be heading towards a long extension, and there is a noticeably different tone coming from ministers last night and this morning.
However, this probably still needs either a referendum or an election to fix it.
I think the long extension is almost nailed on. Even Cabinet members are talking about it today.
There will probably be a PV vote on Monday, which might pass. In which case that provides the justification for an extension. Otherwise the alternative looks like a GE.
If there's a GE we don't need to identify a deal now. If there's a PV then Parliament will probably identify the WA+CU option as the preferred, or just possibly WA+CM2
The Euro elections will be fun.
I just need to work out which is the worst bunch of lunatics to vote for.
Farage's new Brexit Party will surely win the European elections comfortably and perhaps be enough to give Nationalists the largest number of seats in the European Parliament
No way I’m encouraging him.
I’d vote for someone like Lord Buckethead but, unfortunately, he’s a europhile.
Canvassing for the Tories I think we would be lucky to get 1 MEP per region if as is increasingly likely we are still in the EU and contest the European elections either because of lengthy extension or revoke
If we did revoke A50, it would not be back to pre-referendum times in the sense that the UK's view of the EU has been very publicly shown to be not wholly positive to put it mildly.
Would this fact act as any kind of brake at all on ever closer union in the years ahead? A number of people i know who voted Leave did so not because the situation with the UK/EU relationship was inherently objectionable but that it seemed the only way to avoid a future where the UK would be dragged in to the EU project much further than they were comfortable with. I.e. Remain was not a vote for the status quo but risked being seen a green light to "More Europe"
I.e. is it possible that a referendum which ended up with technically no change might still therefore have some effect on slowing integration?
I don’t see why Remainers have any responsibility to deal with Leaver impossibilism. If Leavers cannot work out what they want it is not for Remainers to decide for them. If Leavers have failed in their task, and they have, it is open to Remainers now to offer their own ideas as to the best way forward.
But there would appear to be a clear majority developing amongst Leavers for "We voted to leave, so let's just leave. We want OUT!"
OK, often said in the most frightful oiky way, but still. It's heartfelt.
I don't see why a revoke/remain versus deal referendum could not be agreed and carried out in 2 months.
I think the timing issue is adding the legislation passage period plus the electoral commission deciding the wording and preparation period plus a reasonable campaign period. Two months isn't enough for all that.
I see the Conservatives have already won 15 out 39 seats on Fenland council. 12 are returned unopposed, 3 guaranteed election, due to a shortage of opponents.
So far, I've seen 61 Conservative returned unopposed, or guaranteed election.
I’ll be voting Conservative in the locals.
East Hampshire district council is one of the best in the country.
It won't pass because it is foolish and dumb. A referendum that doesn't resolve things isn't going to be agreed, period. And a referedum that unites hard Brexiters and hard remainers - the two most motivated groups - in campaigning against a government deal would be an obvious disaster waiting to happen.
But the same point applies to DEAL v REMAIN. Those same 2 most motivated groups would be united in campaigning against the Deal.
A Deal v Remain referendum would force Brexiteers to confront the essential question of whether they truly want to leave in practice, in a world in which the EU continues to exist.
Some will campaign for the deal. Some will say Brexit is pointless and we might as well stay. Some may duck the question and try to discredit the vote.
Whatever happens, we will get a clear and legitimate result that we can implement without further delay.
I see the Conservatives have already won 15 out 39 seats on Fenland council. 12 are returned unopposed, 3 guaranteed election, due to a shortage of opponents.
So far, I've seen 61 Conservative returned unopposed, or guaranteed election.
I’ll be voting Conservative in the locals.
East Hampshire district council is one of the best in the country.
According to the Spectator, Gove argued at Cabinet that if the only alternative were a no deal exit, Parliament would vote to revoke. And there wasn't any pushback from the rest of Cabinet.
Hence either May asks for a long extension over the weekend, or she waits to see whether May/Corbyn or Monday's option voting produces an answer, then asks for an extension Monday evening once she has a plan.
The EU said last week in the event of No Deal there would be no mini/sectoral deals.
Pretty bold by them considering we hold all the cards.
The EU have already announced their plans to cover flights, freight transport and various other issues in the event of a no deal. These were announced and officially adopted by the Commission last autumn. So unless they have explicitly reversed those decisions then the Guardian is writing Bullshit.
Those aren't deals Richard they are edicts that we will follow.
It won't pass because it is foolish and dumb. A referendum that doesn't resolve things isn't going to be agreed, period. And a referedum that unites hard Brexiters and hard remainers - the two most motivated groups - in campaigning against a government deal would be an obvious disaster waiting to happen.
But the same point applies to DEAL v REMAIN. Those same 2 most motivated groups would be united in campaigning against the Deal.
A Deal v Remain referendum would force Brexiteers to confront the essential question of whether they truly want to leave in practice, in a world in which the EU continues to exist.
Some will campaign for the deal. Some will say Brexit is pointless and we might as well stay. Some may duck the question and try to discredit the vote.
Whatever happens, we will get a clear and legitimate result that we can implement without further delay.
By trashing the deal so much on spurious grounds, Leavers have already wrecked their case in any referendum on it vs Remain. What a shame.
If we did revoke A50, it would not be back to pre-referendum times in the sense that the UK's view of the EU has been very publicly shown to be not wholly positive to put it mildly.
Would this fact act as any kind of brake at all on ever closer union in the years ahead? A number of people i know who voted Leave did so not because the situation with the UK/EU relationship was inherently objectionable but that it seemed the only way to avoid a future where the UK would be dragged in to the EU project much further than they were comfortable with. I.e. Remain was not a vote for the status quo but risked being seen a green light to "More Europe"
I.e. is it possible that a referendum which ended up with technically no change might still therefore have some effect on slowing integration?
Biggest pro EU rally in history arguably happened in London.
On topic: This excellent article by Cyclefree and the responses to it (especially by Labour supporters) are an object lesson in how partisanship distorts understanding. The header very carefully and cogently defines five ways in which Trump and Corbyn are similar. And what's the response (even from Nick P)? To completely ignore the five points Ms Cyclefree makes, and instead to say 'Oh no, Corbyn's not like Trump because of this other difference'.
Well, yes. There are obvious big differences between the two. But the header is spot-on on the disturbing similarities.
Apologies for not having read earlier answers in the thread but the header seems a bit woolly and in places talks not about the principals themselves but their followers, and you could probably make similar comments about, say, Theresa May. Brexit ticks disruptive foreign and trade policies, there are dodgy followers; she made a break with Cameroon policies.
Where does it get us? Corbyn (or May) is like Trump in some ways but not in others and therefore, what exactly?
Comments
The worst outcome, by a distance, is a long period of extension where we continue with current levels of uncertainty, discourage international investment, continue to pay into the pot, paralyse our politics, divide our country ever more deeply about possible second referendums etc etc. Its much worse than the deal, deal +CU, no deal, revoke, pretty much anything less insane.
So that is what they will go for.
Parliament passes something, the people will massively endorse it for the reasons I gave at 1034.
Then we have a clear line under this.
It also needs to added in debate on Friday I heard an MP say “can’t support this as it means {such and such} forever. That’s the sort of MP who needs to be deselected. Forever doesn’t come into it, that’s for the future to choose not us, end up in the Euro or proper pirate island, the only question right now is draw line under crisis and move on from this.
What I proposed neatly does that.
Pretty bold by them considering we hold all the cards.
There will probably be a PV vote on Monday, which might pass. In which case that provides the justification for an extension. Otherwise the alternative looks like a GE.
If there's a GE we don't need to identify a deal now. If there's a PV then Parliament will probably identify the WA+CU option as the preferred, or just possibly WA+CM2
At this point to force outcome they say that.
But at point it becomes No Deal both parties look for every win win scenario they can. Simples.
EU are trying to distract from fact so much is in place to manage no deal with the lie they will be bloody minded not to use those things in event of no deal happening. And they sound unconvincing and pathetic every time they say that
Though you have helpfully filled in some of the details.
It must be Gove, what you're feeling
It gets through with a majority of about 150 to 200 I think.
I just need to work out which is the worst bunch of lunatics to vote for.
Their transparent desire to find an excuse to ignore the democratically expressed will of a majority of voters is why it is opposed
It does draw a line under crisis and move us on for many years because it gets big win in both parlaiment and the country, uniting, yes, but marginalising the two groups of extremists you mentioned.
The problem for the pv and remains is they think they are in stronger position than they are. The fact is there isnt, hasn’t been, will not be a majority in this remainery commons to pass their type of ref. There will be a brexit of sorts and they need to surrender to that.
p.s. apologies for the split infinitive.
Nevertheless I agree with you. It was a clear win for Leave and it is now up to the politicians to make the best of it. If they can't agree to leave in an orderly fashion, and they are not prepared to leave in a disorderly fashion, then they should take it on the chin and cancel.
Well, yes. There are obvious big differences between the two. But the header is spot-on on the disturbing similarities.
I see the Conservatives have already won 15 out 39 seats on Fenland council. 12 are returned unopposed, 3 guaranteed election, due to a shortage of opponents.
So far, I've seen 61 Conservative returned unopposed, or guaranteed election.
And so the fate of the UK will be completely in the hands of the EU. The exact opposite of the position that the referendum was supposed to bring about.
TM deal v revoke
Is the best deal the current one therefore brexit no longer has the country behind it, knowing now what it didn’t know then?
Disputable on the grounds of both patronising and not listening to the electorate, you are talking about economics not necessarily other factors such as
“Come out the SM and reduce immigration will make this country poorer, so you don’t want to do that do You”
“I have already told you to do just that, just get on and fucking do It, we will be happier UK without the immigration regardless of the economics”.
If the world is, and the way out of this, is how you remainers see it, this elephant doesn’t get shot.
https://wikilivres.org/wiki/Shooting_an_Elephant
You. Don’t. Have. A. Choice.
For me, REF2 comes (if it comes) AFTER a pre Brexit GE, with Labour offering it and winning.
If we seek an extension beyond the 22nd May it is a given we take part in the EU elections. They will not push us into no deal if they are seen to be responsible.
As I said earlier, the EU demands the WDA passes on monday for an extension to be considered so TM should put just two options to the HOC on monday.
TM deal or revoke
Same flaw. Worse, in fact, since at least if it were DEAL vs IMPASSE the Deal would have half a chance.
In essence I agree with you on "dumb and foolish" but unfortunately that is an accurate description of ALL possible formulations for REF2.
They generally prefer the imperial system of measure to decimal, not because it is more British, but because twelve toes equals a foot.
https://twitter.com/WestminsterWAG/status/1113718160975454209
Edit: in retrospect, "porn" would have been much funnier.
This is yet another piece of evidence against "intelligent" design, as it would imply that the Creator did not even have a basic grasp of number theory.
I always heard it referred traditionally to "Prisoner Of Mother England"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47807800
Revoke 6,000,000
No Deal 600,000
Are lots of ultra-leave voters unable to sign a petition due to not having a PC? Or are there fewer people than we're told who are really committed to economic chaos? I think that we should be told the details.
I’d vote for someone like Lord Buckethead but, unfortunately, he’s a europhile.
https://twitter.com/eu_commission/status/1111648694703742976?s=21
Maybe that's it.
On the POM issue, some years ago my wife and I were in New Zealand and for various reasons we booked a coach trip. I was in my customary Guardian approved shorts and sandals and after a couple of stops one of the other passengers, an Australian, as was indeed every else on the trip.
'You a Pom, mate?' he asked.
"'Yes"
'Thought you were when I heard you talk, but you can't be; you're not wearing socks with your sandals!'
The measures we and the Member States have taken will mitigate the worst impact of a “no-deal” scenario. The protection offered is real. The measures will make sure that EU and UK citizens can continue to live and work where they are at the moment. They make sure that planes can take off and land. We have adapted our financial instrument to make it possible to help fishing communities. We have identified the ways in which law enforcement cooperation can continue. We have taken steps to mitigate disruption on our financial markets.
The measures we have taken are time-limited and unilateral. They provide a cushion for key EU interests at least until the end of the year. But disruption will be inevitable for citizens, for businesses and for almost every sector.
The United Kingdom will be affected more than the European Union because there is no such thing as a “managed or negotiated no-deal” and there is no such thing as a “no-deal transition”.
And whatever happens, the United Kingdom will still be expected to address the three main separation issues.
- Citizens' rights would still need to be upheld and protected.
- The United Kingdom would still have to honour its financial commitments made as a Member State.
- And thirdly, a solution would still need to be found on the island of Ireland that preserves peace and the internal market. The United Kingdom must fully respect the letter and spirit of the Good Friday Agreement.
“No-deal” does not mean no commitments. And these three issues will not go away. They will be a strict condition to rebuild trust and to start talking on the way forward.
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-19-1970_en.htm
If we did revoke A50, it would not be back to pre-referendum times in the sense that the UK's view of the EU has been very publicly shown to be not wholly positive to put it mildly.
Would this fact act as any kind of brake at all on ever closer union in the years ahead? A number of people i know who voted Leave did so not because the situation with the UK/EU relationship was inherently objectionable but that it seemed the only way to avoid a future where the UK would be dragged in to the EU project much further than they were comfortable with. I.e. Remain was not a vote for the status quo but risked being seen a green light to "More Europe"
I.e. is it possible that a referendum which ended up with technically no change might still therefore have some effect on slowing integration?
OK, often said in the most frightful oiky way, but still. It's heartfelt.
I’ll be voting Conservative in the locals.
East Hampshire district council is one of the best in the country.
Some will campaign for the deal. Some will say Brexit is pointless and we might as well stay. Some may duck the question and try to discredit the vote.
Whatever happens, we will get a clear and legitimate result that we can implement without further delay.
Hence either May asks for a long extension over the weekend, or she waits to see whether May/Corbyn or Monday's option voting produces an answer, then asks for an extension Monday evening once she has a plan.
Where does it get us? Corbyn (or May) is like Trump in some ways but not in others and therefore, what exactly?