Who does the catering at these nosh-ups? Essentially the future of Britain rests on the Cognac being of sufficient quality to cheer the French president.
The most humiliating experience for a British PM in modern history. Arguably the most humiliating episode for the UK since the loss of the American colonies 236 years ago.
Well parliament has denuded her of all authority by not coming up with anything even after 'taking control', what's she supposed to do?
Precisely. The crowing of her opponents at the fact that they have put her in an impossible position, damaged the UK economy by the unnecessary uncertainty, and made the UK look ridiculous is disgraceful.
Why was she so secretive about the deal ? Why did she think it would pass ? Was it stupidity or naivety? Why didn’t she get the DUP in the loop earlier ? Was the sign of losing so many ministers not a big frigging hint !?
Sure, but Labour aren't opposing it because they don't think it's a good deal (it's virtually indistinguishable from their proposal, inasmuch as their proposal isn't fantasy), they are opposing it for the sake of opposing it. Fair enough, you might say, but let's not pretend that the 'humiliation' is caused by anything other than Labour cynically teaming up with the ERG nutters.
No, the PD is crucial. Tories cannot be trusted to keep their word, indeed several high profile ones have already threatened to reneg on the PD. Labour are right to stick out for CU and retention of workers, consumer and environmental rights, and they need to have a lock on it.
Poppycock, the PD can't be locked down. A parliament can't bind its successors, and the EU won't discuss anything substantive until we've left. The Labour position is just a cynical excuse to cause trouble, and everyone knows it.
The most humiliating experience for a British PM in modern history. Arguably the most humiliating episode for the UK since the loss of the American colonies 236 years ago.
Well parliament has denuded her of all authority by not coming up with anything even after 'taking control', what's she supposed to do?
Precisely. The crowing of her opponents at the fact that they have put her in an impossible position, damaged the UK economy by the unnecessary uncertainty, and made the UK look ridiculous is disgraceful.
Why was she so secretive about the deal ? Why did she think it would pass ? Was it stupidity or naivety? Why didn’t she get the DUP in the loop earlier ? Was the sign of losing so many ministers not a big frigging hint !?
Sure, but Labour aren't opposing it because they don't think it's a good deal (it's virtually indistinguishable from their proposal, inasmuch as their proposal isn't fantasy), they are opposing it for the sake of opposing it. Fair enough, you might say, but let's not pretend that the 'humiliation' is caused by anything other than Labour cynically teaming up with the ERG nutters.
That is what oppositions do! I remember Labour causing troubles on the Maastricht treaty in the 1990s because they sensed an opportunity, not because they sided with nutters. This mess over Brexit is a ERG/DUP problem. A Tory acquaintance of mine who is deeply involved in the party blames constituency associations for selecting people obsessed with Europe. There are some who use Europe to get on within the party and some whose whole belief system revolves around the 'problem' of Europe and they will obsess whether the UK is in the EU or outside it.
Unfortunately opposing for the sake of opposing at a time a crisis when the proposal is indistinguishable from yours is probably the time to act like a government in waiting, make the right compromises and come up with something. We have a Government who can’t govern and an opposition who are more interested in opposing than governing.
The most humiliating experience for a British PM in modern history. Arguably the most humiliating episode for the UK since the loss of the American colonies 236 years ago.
Well parliament has denuded her of all authority by not coming up with anything even after 'taking control', what's she supposed to do?
Precisely. The crowing of her opponents at the fact that they have put her in an impossible position, damaged the UK economy by the unnecessary uncertainty, and made the UK look ridiculous is disgraceful.
Why was she so secretive about the deal ? Why did she think it would pass ? Was it stupidity or naivety? Why didn’t she get the DUP in the loop earlier ? Was the sign of losing so many ministers not a big frigging hint !?
Sure, but Labour aren't opposing it because they don't think it's a good deal (it's virtually indistinguishable from their proposal, inasmuch as their proposal isn't fantasy), they are opposing it for the sake of opposing it. Fair enough, you might say, but let's not pretend that the 'humiliation' is caused by anything other than Labour cynically teaming up with the ERG nutters.
No, the PD is crucial. Tories cannot be trusted to keep their word, indeed several high profile ones have already threatened to reneg on the PD. Labour are right to stick out for CU and retention of workers, consumer and environmental rights, and they need to have a lock on it.
Except not even Labour voters agree on that either, 45% of 2017 Labour voters backed a CU, 45% opposed it with Comres this week, the pressure from Labour activists is for a People's Vote or revoke, Corbyn faces a problem with Remainers just as May does with No Dealers.
A CU may be grudgingly accepted by middle ground voters though
The most humiliating experience for a British PM in modern history. Arguably the most humiliating episode for the UK since the loss of the American colonies 236 years ago.
Well parliament has denuded her of all authority by not coming up with anything even after 'taking control', what's she supposed to do?
Precisely. The crowing of her opponents at the fact that they have put her in an impossible position, damaged the UK economy by the unnecessary uncertainty, and made the UK look ridiculous is disgraceful.
Why was she so secretive about the deal ? Why did she think it would pass ? Was it stupidity or naivety? Why didn’t she get the DUP in the loop earlier ? Was the sign of losing so many ministers not a big frigging hint !?
Sure, but Labour aren't opposing it because they don't think it's a good deal (it's virtually indistinguishable from their proposal, inasmuch as their proposal isn't fantasy), they are opposing it for the sake of opposing it. Fair enough, you might say, but let's not pretend that the 'humiliation' is caused by anything other than Labour cynically teaming up with the ERG nutters.
That's a bit of it, sure, but there are other reasons. It helps to paper over the Brexit divisions within the Labour Party to an extent too. Then there's the wish not to feed the betrayal myth of the Leavers by being seen to impose a fake Brexit onto the true believers. There are many more reasons to oppose the Withdrawal Agreement beyond mere cynicism.
And what reason do they have to support it? Logical consistency and responsible governance?
Kate Hoey on Newsnight is saying that parliament shouldn't have been involved in this. Obviously a fan of @isam.
I’m flattered!
Such an obvious point. The only reason they got involved was to stop us leaving, and the only reason we had a referendum was because parliament and the people disagreed.
IDS anyone. The Tories are loony enough to do it again.
Some might remember the triumphs of his speeches! I think he managed 17 standing ovations at his last conference as leader. The current PM often finds she has no voice at all rather than talking about turning up the volume! The current and past leader of course could be outdone by Boris Johnson though, he likes a laugh so he would probably turn up to Conservative conference dressed as a WWII SS commandant! They are clearly so detached from reality that even that is not beyond the scope of how a post Brexit nationalistic Tory party led by Johnson would behave...
Who does the catering at these nosh-ups? Essentially the future of Britain rests on the Cognac being of sufficient quality to cheer the French president.
Let’s hope they have given him some nice cheese. I would recommend a Marolles
The most humiliating experience for a British PM in modern history. Arguably the most humiliating episode for the UK since the loss of the American colonies 236 years ago.
Well parliament has denuded her of all authority by not coming up with anything even after 'taking control', what's she supposed to do?
Precisely. The crowing of her opponents at the fact that they have put her in an impossible position, damaged the UK economy by the unnecessary uncertainty, and made the UK look ridiculous is disgraceful.
Why was she so secretive about the deal ? Why did she think it would pass ? Was it stupidity or naivety? Why didn’t she get the DUP in the loop earlier ? Was the sign of losing so many ministers not a big frigging hint !?
Sure, but Labour aren't opposing it because they don't think it's a good deal (it's virtually indistinguishable from their proposal, inasmuch as their proposal isn't fantasy), they are opposing it for the sake of opposing it. Fair enough, you might say, but let's not pretend that the 'humiliation' is caused by anything other than Labour cynically teaming up with the ERG nutters.
No, the PD is crucial. Tories cannot be trusted to keep their word, indeed several high profile ones have already threatened to reneg on the PD. Labour are right to stick out for CU and retention of workers, consumer and environmental rights, and they need to have a lock on it.
Except not even Labour voters agree on that either, 45% of 2017 Labour voters backed a CU, 45% opposed it with Comres this week, the pressure from Labour activists is for a People's Vote or revoke, Corbyn faces a problem with Remainers just as May does with No Dealers.
A CU may be grudgingly accepted by middle ground voters though
Nobody has any idea what this CU will cost. I suspect when that 45% in favour are told the cost, they will scream "HOW MUCH????"
The most humiliating experience for a British PM in modern history. Arguably the most humiliating episode for the UK since the loss of the American colonies 236 years ago.
Well parliament has denuded her of all authority by not coming up with anything even after 'taking control', what's she supposed to do?
Precisely. The crowing of her opponents at the fact that they have put her in an impossible position, damaged the UK economy by the unnecessary uncertainty, and made the UK look ridiculous is disgraceful.
Why was she so secretive about the deal ? Why did she think it would pass ? Was it stupidity or naivety? Why didn’t she get the DUP in the loop earlier ? Was the sign of losing so many ministers not a big frigging hint !?
Sure, but Labour aren't opposing it because they don't think it's a good deal (it's virtually indistinguishable from their proposal, inasmuch as their proposal isn't fantasy), they are opposing it for the sake of opposing it. Fair enough, you might say, but let's not pretend that the 'humiliation' is caused by anything other than Labour cynically teaming up with the ERG nutters.
No, the PD is crucial. Tories cannot be trusted to keep their word, indeed several high profile ones have already threatened to reneg on the PD. Labour are right to stick out for CU and retention of workers, consumer and environmental rights, and they need to have a lock on it.
Poppycock, the PD can't be locked down. A parliament can't bind its successors, and the EU won't discuss anything substantive until we've left. The Labour position is just a cynical excuse to cause trouble, and everyone knows it.
You mean if only Labour would agree with the Conservatives everything would be ok?
Kate Hoey on Newsnight is saying that parliament shouldn't have been involved in this. Obviously a fan of @isam.
I’m flattered!
Such an obvious point. The only reason they got involved was to stop us leaving, and the only reason we had a referendum was because parliament and the people disagreed.
She'd have a stronger point if she hadn't herself voted three times against the Withdrawal Agreement.
If the EU agree an extension tonight I hope that in the excitement Mrs may hasn't forgot The European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 (Exit Day) (Amendment) Regulations 2019 which currently in section 2.(2)(b) sets "exit day" as 22nd April. IS there any debate planned on a new statutory instrument tomorrow?
The most humiliating experience for a British PM in modern history. Arguably the most humiliating episode for the UK since the loss of the American colonies 236 years ago.
Well parliament has denuded her of all authority by not coming up with anything even after 'taking control', what's she supposed to do?
Precisely. The crowing of her opponents at the fact that they have put her in an impossible position, damaged the UK economy by the unnecessary uncertainty, and made the UK look ridiculous is disgraceful.
Why was she so secretive about the deal ? Why did she think it would pass ? Was it stupidity or naivety? Why didn’t she get the DUP in the loop earlier ? Was the sign of losing so many ministers not a big frigging hint !?
Sure, but Labour aren't opposing it because they don't think it's a good deal (it's virtually indistinguishable from their proposal, inasmuch as their proposal isn't fantasy), they are opposing it for the sake of opposing it. Fair enough, you might say, but let's not pretend that the 'humiliation' is caused by anything other than Labour cynically teaming up with the ERG nutters.
No, the PD is crucial. Tories cannot be trusted to keep their word, indeed several high profile ones have already threatened to reneg on the PD. Labour are right to stick out for CU and retention of workers, consumer and environmental rights, and they need to have a lock on it.
Except not even Labour voters agree on that either, 45% of 2017 Labour voters backed a CU, 45% opposed it with Comres this week, the pressure from Labour activists is for a People's Vote or revoke, Corbyn faces a problem with Remainers just as May does with No Dealers.
A CU may be grudgingly accepted by middle ground voters though
Nobody has any idea what this CU will cost. I suspect when that 45% in favour are told the cost, they will scream "HOW MUCH????"
Bit like the rest of Brexit, forget the £39 Billion divorce bill it is going to be a shed more money for no apparent gain!
You mean if only Labour would agree with the Conservatives everything would be ok?
No, I mean that everything would be (relatively) OK if Labour voted for the Withdrawal Agreement with which they have no disagreement, and which is the only one available anyway.
Kate Hoey on Newsnight is saying that parliament shouldn't have been involved in this. Obviously a fan of @isam.
I’m flattered!
Such an obvious point. The only reason they got involved was to stop us leaving, and the only reason we had a referendum was because parliament and the people disagreed.
She'd have a stronger point if she hadn't herself voted three times against the Withdrawal Agreement.
The point is so strong it doesn’t matter who said it!
The most humiliating experience for a British PM in modern history. Arguably the most humiliating episode for the UK since the loss of the American colonies 236 years ago.
Well parliament has denuded her of all authority by not coming up with anything even after 'taking control', what's she supposed to do?
Precisely. The crowing of her opponents at the fact that they have put her in an impossible position, damaged the UK economy by the unnecessary uncertainty, and made the UK look ridiculous is disgraceful.
Why was she so secretive about the deal ? Why did she think it would pass ? Was it stupidity or naivety? Why didn’t she get the DUP in the loop earlier ? Was the sign of losing so many ministers not a big frigging hint !?
Sure, but Labour aren't opposing it because they don't think it's a good deal (it's virtually indistinguishable from their proposal, inasmuch as their proposal isn't fantasy), they are opposing it for the sake of opposing it. Fair enough, you might say, but let's not pretend that the 'humiliation' is caused by anything other than Labour cynically teaming up with the ERG nutters.
No, the PD is crucial. Tories cannot be trusted to keep their word, indeed several high profile ones have already threatened to reneg on the PD. Labour are right to stick out for CU and retention of workers, consumer and environmental rights, and they need to have a lock on it.
Except not even Labour voters agree on that either, 45% of 2017 Labour voters backed a CU, 45% opposed it with Comres this week, the pressure from Labour activists is for a People's Vote or revoke, Corbyn faces a problem with Remainers just as May does with No Dealers.
A CU may be grudgingly accepted by middle ground voters though
Nobody has any idea what this CU will cost. I suspect when that 45% in favour are told the cost, they will scream "HOW MUCH????"
Well it will still cost less than the economic damage of No Deal and the political damage of Revoke
"Perhaps there are those who think that Scruton should not have agreed to be interviewed by the New Statesman, the left-wing magazine being unlikely to conduct a fair interview."
I thought this chap was supposed to be an intellectual? Damning with faint praise indeed for the Spectator to be saying he's too thick to know that his answers will get him into trouble.
I suspect at this point if it was a case of do nothing and stay in. we would actually do nothing and stay in. Brexit is in the too difficult basket. It's getting through to all but the most deluded that no-one serious, EU or otherwise, will offer terms that are as good as now. That UK ministers will be hanging around the lobby in Brussels while the prime minister of Latvia, who has a vote unlike the UK, decides what we need to do and that this is the very opposite of "taking control". That Brexit is a massive distraction, a huge mess and will cost enormously for no real benefit.
Problem is, there is no do nothing option. (Don't imagine No Deal is such. It's do nothing in the same way as seeing your house burn down. You have to do something - call the fire brigade, find a new place to live)
On a related topic, good piece about why a moderate, bogged down and damage limited Brexit is poor return on anyone's political capital. Labour don't benefit by owning the mess that results from Brexit. Conservatives don't benefit from crossing their red lines and accepting that Brexit means damage that needs limiting.
The most humiliating experience for a British PM in modern history. Arguably the most humiliating episode for the UK since the loss of the American colonies 236 years ago.
Well parliament has denuded her of all authority by not coming up with anything even after 'taking control', what's she supposed to do?
Precisely. The crowing of her opponents at the fact that they have put her in an impossible position, damaged the UK economy by the unnecessary uncertainty, and made the UK look ridiculous is disgraceful.
Why was she so secretive about the deal ? Why did she think it would pass ? Was it stupidity or naivety? Why didn’t she get the DUP in the loop earlier ? Was the sign of losing so many ministers not a big frigging hint !?
Sure, but Labour aren't opposing it because they don't think it's a good deal (it's virtually indistinguishable from their proposal, inasmuch as their proposal isn't fantasy), they are opposing it for the sake of opposing it. Fair enough, you might say, but let's not pretend that the 'humiliation' is caused by anything other than Labour cynically teaming up with the ERG nutters.
No, the PD is crucial. Tories cannot be trusted to keep their word, indeed several high profile ones have already threatened to reneg on the PD. Labour are right to stick out for CU and retention of workers, consumer and environmental rights, and they need to have a lock on it.
Poppycock, the PD can't be locked down. A parliament can't bind its successors, and the EU won't discuss anything substantive until we've left. The Labour position is just a cynical excuse to cause trouble, and everyone knows it.
A parliament can bind its successors now. All you need to do is hold and win a referendum.
The most humiliating experience for a British PM in modern history. Arguably the most humiliating episode for the UK since the loss of the American colonies 236 years ago.
Well parliament has denuded her of all authority by not coming up with anything even after 'taking control', what's she supposed to do?
Precisely. The crowing of her opponents at the fact that they have put her in an impossible position, damaged the UK economy by the unnecessary uncertainty, and made the UK look ridiculous is disgraceful.
Why was she so secretive about the deal ? Why did she think it would pass ? Was it stupidity or naivety? Why didn’t she get the DUP in the loop earlier ? Was the sign of losing so many ministers not a big frigging hint !?
Sure, but Labour aren't opposing it because they don't think it's a good deal (it's virtually indistinguishable from their proposal, inasmuch as their proposal isn't fantasy), they are opposing it for the sake of opposing it. Fair enough, you might say, but let's not pretend that the 'humiliation' is caused by anything other than Labour cynically teaming up with the ERG nutters.
That is what oppositions do! I remember Labour causing troubles on the Maastricht treaty in the 1990s because they sensed an opportunity, not because they sided with nutters. This mess over Brexit is a ERG/DUP problem. A Tory acquaintance of mine who is deeply involved in the party blames constituency associations for selecting people obsessed with Europe. There are some who use Europe to get on within the party and some whose whole belief system revolves around the 'problem' of Europe and they will obsess whether the UK is in the EU or outside it.
Unfortunately opposing for the sake of opposing at a time a crisis when the proposal is indistinguishable from yours is probably the time to act like a government in waiting, make the right compromises and come up with something. We have a Government who can’t govern and an opposition who are more interested in opposing than governing.
Yes Blair/Cameron would be behaving like an alternative Govt but Corbyn is not really serious about being PM. He probably could not handle the pressure to be honest. I would not vote for Corbyn if I was paid by the way!
You mean if only Labour would agree with the Conservatives everything would be ok?
No, I mean that everything would be (relatively) OK if Labour voted for the Withdrawal Agreement with which they have no disagreement, and which is the only one available anyway.
I think you have a (minor) blind spot here. Not only is it not Labour's job to prop up the government but the government can't even convince itself let alone its own party.
How on earth could or should the opposition support the government under those circumstances?
Kate Hoey on Newsnight is saying that parliament shouldn't have been involved in this. Obviously a fan of @isam.
I’m flattered!
Such an obvious point. The only reason they got involved was to stop us leaving, and the only reason we had a referendum was because parliament and the people disagreed.
She'd have a stronger point if she hadn't herself voted three times against the Withdrawal Agreement.
The point is so strong it doesn’t matter who said it!
Not really. It's a bit odd to say parliament should let the executive get on with it and then vote against the executive getting on with it, isn't it?
If there are 316 Tory MPs is an achievement to be a 400/1 shot for next leader.
I wouldn’t take it if it was 1000/1. Mark Francois has got as much chance of winning the Tory leadership as I have of getting a Nobel peace prize. Outside of some terrible incident, let’s say a meteorite hitting Parliament, and he was left as the only Tory standing like in the US tv series Designated Survivor where Kiefer Sutherland becomes president.
It would not be inconceivable that he could get nominated after some sort of reservoir dogs ERG massacre. I’m laughing as I write this but he makes Boris look sane!!!
You mean if only Labour would agree with the Conservatives everything would be ok?
No, I mean that everything would be (relatively) OK if Labour voted for the Withdrawal Agreement with which they have no disagreement, and which is the only one available anyway.
I think you have a (minor) blind spot here. Not only is it not Labour's job to prop up the government but the government can't even convince itself let alone its own party.
How on earth could or should the opposition support the government under those circumstances?
It's not being asked to support the government. It's being asked to vote to ratify an international treaty with which it has no quarrel and which is a necessary condition for its own policy.
You mean if only Labour would agree with the Conservatives everything would be ok?
No, I mean that everything would be (relatively) OK if Labour voted for the Withdrawal Agreement with which they have no disagreement, and which is the only one available anyway.
I think you have a (minor) blind spot here. Not only is it not Labour's job to prop up the government but the government can't even convince itself let alone its own party.
How on earth could or should the opposition support the government under those circumstances?
It's not being asked to support the government. It's being asked to vote to ratify an international treaty with which it has no quarrel.
You mean if only Labour would agree with the Conservatives everything would be ok?
No, I mean that everything would be (relatively) OK if Labour voted for the Withdrawal Agreement with which they have no disagreement, and which is the only one available anyway.
I think you have a (minor) blind spot here. Not only is it not Labour's job to prop up the government but the government can't even convince itself let alone its own party.
How on earth could or should the opposition support the government under those circumstances?
It's not being asked to support the government. It's being asked to vote to ratify an international treaty with which it has no quarrel.
It is, proverbially, Theresa May's Deal.
Yes, well that was one of the many entirely avoidable PR blunders of Theresa May.
The most humiliating experience for a British PM in modern history. Arguably the most humiliating episode for the UK since the loss of the American colonies 236 years ago.
Well parliament has denuded her of all authority by not coming up with anything even after 'taking control', what's she supposed to do?
Precisely. The crowing of her opponents at the fact that they have put her in an impossible position, damaged the UK economy by the unnecessary uncertainty, and made the UK look ridiculous is disgraceful.
Why was she so secretive about the deal ? Why did she think it would pass ? Was it stupidity or naivety? Why didn’t she get the DUP in the loop earlier ? Was the sign of losing so many ministers not a big frigging hint !?
Sure, but Labour aren't opposing it because they don't think it's a good deal (it's virtually indistinguishable from their proposal, inasmuch as their proposal isn't fantasy), they are opposing it for the sake of opposing it. Fair enough, you might say, but let's not pretend that the 'humiliation' is caused by anything other than Labour cynically teaming up with the ERG nutters.
No, the PD is crucial. Tories cannot be trusted to keep their word, indeed several high profile ones have already threatened to reneg on the PD. Labour are right to stick out for CU and retention of workers, consumer and environmental rights, and they need to have a lock on it.
Except not even Labour voters agree on that either, 45% of 2017 Labour voters backed a CU, 45% opposed it with Comres this week, the pressure from Labour activists is for a People's Vote or revoke, Corbyn faces a problem with Remainers just as May does with No Dealers.
A CU may be grudgingly accepted by middle ground voters though
Nobody has any idea what this CU will cost. I suspect when that 45% in favour are told the cost, they will scream "HOW MUCH????"
Well it will still cost less than the economic damage of No Deal and the political damage of Revoke
It will still add massively to the narrative that MPs having got a fucking clue....
You mean if only Labour would agree with the Conservatives everything would be ok?
No, I mean that everything would be (relatively) OK if Labour voted for the Withdrawal Agreement with which they have no disagreement, and which is the only one available anyway.
I think you have a (minor) blind spot here. Not only is it not Labour's job to prop up the government but the government can't even convince itself let alone its own party.
How on earth could or should the opposition support the government under those circumstances?
But the reason she cannot take all her party is that she has come to her own consensus position, and to be fair we are saying outside of political interest there would probably be a majority for the WA.
Her personality fault is that she relies to much on her own calculation, and does not appear to have considered listening. The reports on her consultations where she listens politely and then repeats back her proposal demonstate this.
Maybe the best outcome of the next election is Corbyn in Downing Street with support from Sturgeon in return for another Indy referendum, which hopefully would be defeated by 60% to 40%. That would be the end of Scottish Nationalism for at least 20 years.
Um no. Given we are still members, what this shows is that inside the EU we have no control at all. This situation is a perfect example of what it will be like permanently for the UK if we do not leave now.
It really isn’t.
What we’re asking for is a temporary extension of our membership, which we have voluntarily taken steps to surrender. That has bugger all to do with our legal ability to exercise our membership rights while we are members.
Except to a large extent our membership rights are the equivalent of sitting in the corridor outside or just going along with whatever the rest of the EU want. It is the 'joy' of QMV
Kate Hoey on Newsnight is saying that parliament shouldn't have been involved in this. Obviously a fan of @isam.
I’m flattered!
Such an obvious point. The only reason they got involved was to stop us leaving, and the only reason we had a referendum was because parliament and the people disagreed.
She'd have a stronger point if she hadn't herself voted three times against the Withdrawal Agreement.
The point is so strong it doesn’t matter who said it!
Not really. It's a bit odd to say parliament should let the executive get on with it and then vote against the executive getting on with it, isn't it?
It is a bit odd. I can kind of see the logic in it, if she’s saying she shouldn’t have got a vote on it, but having got one she felt she had to vote against it.
The most humiliating experience for a British PM in modern history. Arguably the most humiliating episode for the UK since the loss of the American colonies 236 years ago.
And do those take back controllers really think it will be different during our forthcoming negotiations?
It’s not humiliating.
Because of Parliament’s truculence we need an extension. We’ve requested one. Our counterparty is debating whether to give us one.
I’ve done a deal when we stopped a 45 day clock for 360 days before finally agreed terms. And if our counterparty want agreed there was a tedious process that done of us wanted involved.
You mean if only Labour would agree with the Conservatives everything would be ok?
No, I mean that everything would be (relatively) OK if Labour voted for the Withdrawal Agreement with which they have no disagreement, and which is the only one available anyway.
I think you have a (minor) blind spot here. Not only is it not Labour's job to prop up the government but the government can't even convince itself let alone its own party.
How on earth could or should the opposition support the government under those circumstances?
But the reason she cannot take all her party is that she has come to her own consensus position, and to be fair we are saying outside of political interest there would probably be a majority for the WA.
Her personality fault is that she relies to much on her own calculation, and does not appear to have considered listening. The reports on her consultations where she listens politely and then repeats back her proposal demonstate this.
Absolutely and this goes deeper than @Richard_Nabavi's "PR blunder".
She is PM and leader of the Conservative Party and she got is here in the name of that party and people think the Opposition should bail her and her party out.
The most humiliating experience for a British PM in modern history. Arguably the most humiliating episode for the UK since the loss of the American colonies 236 years ago.
And do those take back controllers really think it will be different during our forthcoming negotiations?
It’s not humiliating.
Because of Parliament’s truculence we need an extension. We’ve requested one. Our counterparty is debating whether to give us one.
I’ve done a deal when we stopped a 45 day clock for 360 days before finally agreed terms. And if our counterparty want agreed there was a tedious process that done of us wanted involved.
If you think this is being in control and not a humiliation then I'd hate to think what a bad negotiating position would look like to you.
This story may well get lost in the noise, but it looks like Labour's suggestion that we could have been in the EU's customs union and still had a say in it wasn't as far fetched as it sounded.
You mean if only Labour would agree with the Conservatives everything would be ok?
No, I mean that everything would be (relatively) OK if Labour voted for the Withdrawal Agreement with which they have no disagreement, and which is the only one available anyway.
I think you have a (minor) blind spot here. Not only is it not Labour's job to prop up the government but the government can't even convince itself let alone its own party.
How on earth could or should the opposition support the government under those circumstances?
But the reason she cannot take all her party is that she has come to her own consensus position, and to be fair we are saying outside of political interest there would probably be a majority for the WA.
Her personality fault is that she relies to much on her own calculation, and does not appear to have considered listening. The reports on her consultations where she listens politely and then repeats back her proposal demonstate this.
Theresa May is incompetent but it probably makes a marginal difference to the end result. Brexit was always going to end in the morass. In the same way people like to blame the ERG for undermining their own Brexit, but a) they didn't have the votes to get Brexit through anyway and b) nobody votes emotionally for something and then accepts damage limitation. It's unrealistic. They didn't promote, vote and live Leave just to mitigate the worst effects of this decision,
Um no. Given we are still members, what this shows is that inside the EU we have no control at all. This situation is a perfect example of what it will be like permanently for the UK if we do not leave now.
It really isn’t.
What we’re asking for is a temporary extension of our membership, which we have voluntarily taken steps to surrender. That has bugger all to do with our legal ability to exercise our membership rights while we are members.
Except to a large extent our membership rights are the equivalent of sitting in the corridor outside or just going along with whatever the rest of the EU want. It is the 'joy' of QMV
Similar joys await us post any conceivable Brexit. Just wait until we try to negotiate a trade deal with Trump.
Maybe the best outcome of the next election is Corbyn in Downing Street with support from Sturgeon in return for another Indy referendum, which hopefully would be defeated by 60% to 40%. That would be the end of Scottish Nationalism for at least 20 years.
Without No Deal the chances of a Yes vote in any indyref2 are very low anyway, so Sturgeon caught in the trap she has to back BINO or Revoke but that strengthens the Union
I spoke to a friend this morning who was instrumental in standing up Benny Gantz’s challenges
The biggest surprise and disappointment was Arab turnout - they feel so beaten down by the new legislation that they didn’t vote - turnout in this section of the community was half normal levels
If they had voted at normal rates it would have been Ciao Bibi.
But they are proud of what they achieved from a standing start in a few months and are not going away
The most humiliating experience for a British PM in modern history. Arguably the most humiliating episode for the UK since the loss of the American colonies 236 years ago.
And do those take back controllers really think it will be different during our forthcoming negotiations?
It’s not humiliating.
Because of Parliament’s truculence we need an extension. We’ve requested one. Our counterparty is debating whether to give us one.
I’ve done a deal when we stopped a 45 day clock for 360 days before finally agreed terms. And if our counterparty want agreed there was a tedious process that done of us wanted involved.
If you think this is being in control and not a humiliation then I'd hate to think what a bad negotiating position would look like to you.
Being emotional about negotiations is a bad negotiating position
The most humiliating experience for a British PM in modern history. Arguably the most humiliating episode for the UK since the loss of the American colonies 236 years ago.
And do those take back controllers really think it will be different during our forthcoming negotiations?
It’s not humiliating.
Because of Parliament’s truculence we need an extension. We’ve requested one. Our counterparty is debating whether to give us one.
I’ve done a deal when we stopped a 45 day clock for 360 days before finally agreed terms. And if our counterparty want agreed there was a tedious process that done of us wanted involved.
If you think this is being in control and not a humiliation then I'd hate to think what a bad negotiating position would look like to you.
Being emotional about negotiations is a bad negotiating position
Countries aren’t humiliated.
Really? I am so embarrassed by the whole thing that if I spoke any other language well enough to pass as a native I'd be lying about my origins in casual conversations while abroad.
Comments
Ridiculous.
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/04/roger-scrutons-sacking-exposes-the-tories-cowardice/
A CU may be grudgingly accepted by middle ground voters though
And what reason do they have to support it? Logical consistency and responsible governance?
Small beer in comparison.
Such an obvious point. The only reason they got involved was to stop us leaving, and the only reason we had a referendum was because parliament and the people disagreed.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maroilles_cheese
I thought this chap was supposed to be an intellectual? Damning with faint praise indeed for the Spectator to be saying he's too thick to know that his answers will get him into trouble.
https://twitter.com/Mendelpol/status/1116099877564485632
https://twitter.com/Mendelpol/status/1116100242653491201
Problem is, there is no do nothing option. (Don't imagine No Deal is such. It's do nothing in the same way as seeing your house burn down. You have to do something - call the fire brigade, find a new place to live)
On a related topic, good piece about why a moderate, bogged down and damage limited Brexit is poor return on anyone's political capital. Labour don't benefit by owning the mess that results from Brexit. Conservatives don't benefit from crossing their red lines and accepting that Brexit means damage that needs limiting.
https://twitter.com/rafaelbehr/status/1115864593748905984
How on earth could or should the opposition support the government under those circumstances?
It would not be inconceivable that he could get nominated after some sort of reservoir dogs ERG massacre. I’m laughing as I write this but he makes Boris look sane!!!
https://twitter.com/pmdfoster/status/1116099508281184261
And an interesting point from the Greeks.
Her personality fault is that she relies to much on her own calculation, and does not appear to have considered listening. The reports on her consultations where she listens politely and then repeats back her proposal demonstate this.
Because of Parliament’s truculence we need an extension. We’ve requested one. Our counterparty is debating whether to give us one.
I’ve done a deal when we stopped a 45 day clock for 360 days before finally agreed terms. And if our counterparty want agreed there was a tedious process that done of us wanted involved.
What do I care?!
She is PM and leader of the Conservative Party and she got is here in the name of that party and people think the Opposition should bail her and her party out.
And then she leaves. To be followed by...
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-britain-customs-union-irish-pm-leo-varadkar-trade-deals-a8864016.html
Just wait until we try to negotiate a trade deal with Trump.
Review date at end of June
Still, France is nowhere near as isolated as we are.
Tory party meltdown alert...
So in short I agree: Virtually certain we will contest them.
NEW THREAD
https://twitter.com/EuropeElects/status/1115917718585266176
That starts with Cabinet telling Theresa May tomorrow that times up and getting a new Con leader/PM followed by a general election in July.
(sorry, yes I saw it about 5 seconds after I pressed "Post"...
The biggest surprise and disappointment was Arab turnout - they feel so beaten down by the new legislation that they didn’t vote - turnout in this section of the community was half normal levels
If they had voted at normal rates it would have been Ciao Bibi.
But they are proud of what they achieved from a standing start in a few months and are not going away
Countries aren’t humiliated.