Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » New Rules. Britain’s changing constitution
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » New Rules. Britain’s changing constitution
Sometimes it only takes a small change to alter the shape of things radically. In Backroom Boys by Francis Spufford, the developers of the 80s computer game Elite explained that the introduction of a scoop for a tiny dollop of memory transformed the possibilities, allowing players to become pirates as well as traders.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
What are the odds on "No overall Majority" at the next GE? I'd rate it as a 70% chance, though of course a lot can happen in (probably) 3 years.
But she won't.
Lack of foresight when making constitutional changes has been something of a habit for a complacent political class.
> Although Theresa May could still make it a vote of confidence, if she wished. 'Vote for this, or I bring forward a motion for a general election.' And as we saw in 2017, there's no way it would be voted down. No politician can afford to be seen to be frit of their electorate.
>
> But she won't.
I wouldn't be so sure - both May and Corbyn have reasonably strong senses of self-preservation. The horror show that was the local elections were but an amuse bouche to the carnage that will be unleashed at the Euros - where I expect both the Brexit Party and the Lib Dems to flourish - as the only parties having clear positions on Brexit. We also saw in the locals that the electorate remains engaged and will go out and vote. The only way May & Corbyn can mitigate this is remove the Euro's relevance. 'Fine you voted for them, but they'll never take their seats'. Would <i>either</i> front bench wish future negotiations played out against the demented greek chorus of that lot in the European Parliament?
As Mrs May writes in her Sunday Mail article 'No Parliament can bind its successor' - but if the ERG loons are too dim to take the hint (which is entirely possible) and Corbyn believes "one more heave" (of election losses) is all it will take to get into power, then who knows?
Edit - and great article, thank you Mr Meeks - and for those who haven't seen it:
https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1124668513984155648
However, in this specific case, I wonder if things would really have been different. Would TMay have dared bring up her deal as a matter of confidence? The opposition would have voted solidly against - I doubt she'd have got a single vote outside Con/DUP. Meanwhile, on the government's side, some Tory MPs might have gone kamikaze. But more importantly, could she count on the DUP? They're against the WA, they've always said they're against the WA, and if there's a new election they can fight it and survive. They'd have told TMay this in advance, and if she'd tried to call their bluff she'd have discovered they weren't bluffing.
I think the upshot is that TMay wouldn't have brought the WA as a matter of confidence, and we'd be exactly where we are now.
> Interesting piece - shows how the Fixed Term Parliaments Act is meaningful, but doesn't at all do what it says on the tin.
>
> However, in this specific case, I wonder if things would really have been different. Would TMay have dared bring up her deal as a matter of confidence? The opposition would have voted solidly against - I doubt she'd have got a single vote outside Con/DUP. Meanwhile, on the government's side, some Tory MPs might have gone kamikaze. But more importantly, could she count on the DUP? They're against the WA, they've always said they're against the WA, and if there's a new election they can fight it and survive. They'd have told TMay this in advance, and if she'd tried to call their bluff she'd have discovered they weren't bluffing.
>
> I think the upshot is that TMay wouldn't have brought the WA as a matter of confidence, and we'd be exactly where we are now.
>
>
> @IanB2 said:
> An interesting lead, but the instance doesn’t prove the argument. For does anyone believe that a confidence vote would have changed the implacable opposition from the likes of Baker and Francois?
There wouldn’t have been a meaningful vote in the first place.
> An interesting lead, but the instance doesn’t prove the argument. For does anyone believe that a confidence vote would have changed the implacable opposition from the likes of Baker and Francois?
Which, for those two, is more important; a Conservative Government or a Hard Brexit?
I suggest the former.
Thanks
> > @IanB2 said:
>
> > An interesting lead, but the instance doesn’t prove the argument. For does anyone believe that a confidence vote would have changed the implacable opposition from the likes of Baker and Francois?
> Which, for those two, is more important; a Conservative Government or a Hard Brexit?
> I suggest the former.
>
> I suspect the latter, unfortunately. They've lost all sense - like Corbynistas only with the great disadvantage that they're in power rather than in the safe irrelevance of opposition.
Being a liberal and therefore prepared to see other people's view, I understand what you are saying, but TBH, I wonder, when push came to shove, whether Francois in particular wouldn't fall into line. He appears to have a safe seat, but I do wonder how firm the political attitudes of my former neighbours in South Essex are.
As Bertrand Russell said "The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts"
There is no agreed Brexit plan that commands a majority of popular support within the country, so it is not surprising that Parliament cannot agree one either.
> Good morning, everyone.
>
> Lack of foresight when making constitutional changes has been something of a habit for a complacent political class.
Was there a lack of foresight? The goal was to prevent minority groups that were needed to keep a government in office from getting steamrollered by the PM. It's working.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48123323
Off topic, today my youngest is 21. This is very significant for him but also feels like a milestone for me and his father.
He is revising furiously for his finals, having just finished his dissertation on the growth of populism in Italy. A future PB'er in the making....?
Out for dinner with 9 colleagues last night, all quite senior. The Euro vote came up over dessert, and not raised by my good self. Much hostility to Corbyn, but strong support for the LDs. I am reconsidering my own inclination to vote Green after Fridays result, as it does look like Remainers will coalesce around the LDs. Even a self described Thatcherite was going that way.
In other news, it is up to Brendan Rogers to make the last day of the PL interesting. I think the odds on Man City beating Leicester are too short at 1.19, I reckon this is value as a lay and Leicester may well get some points. We did draw with Liverpool at Anfield, thrashed Arsenal last week and are one of the few teams to beat Man City this season, when we won 2:1 on Boxing Day.
> Thank you for an interesting article @AlastairMeeks.
>
> Off topic, today my youngest is 21. This is very significant for him but also feels like a milestone for me and his father.
>
> He is revising furiously for his finals, having just finished his dissertation on the growth of populism in Italy. A future PB'er in the making....?
Congratulations to your son, and the very best for his finals.
> > @Morris_Dancer said:
> > Good morning, everyone.
> > Lack of foresight when making constitutional changes has been something of a habit for a complacent political class.
> Was there a lack of foresight? The goal was to prevent minority groups that were needed to keep a government in office from getting steamrollered by the PM. It's working.
I think you are right. At the heart of the problem is that Mrs May and her Conservatives did not win an overall majority in her impetuous general election, and the silly old woman tries to carry on as though she had. She needed to play this situation with intelligence and sensitivity, reaching out from the beginning to the whole of Parliament. Instead, she did everything possible to placate her own hard-liners, and there was never any chance of that line getting through Parliament.
BTW, have you heard about the 'fireworks' your friends fired into Israel last night, starting an almighty mess?
We've seen how popular that is. Those view will be reinforced on the 23rd. Does anyone else think there must be a cunning plan emerging before then that is neither cunning nor planned?
And how would that have resolved the massive gulf that lies between the hardcore remainers and leavers? What could she have done to bridge the chasm that exists between them, and yet take into account what was feasible from the EU's perspective?
And just to remind you: remain lost. It lost because remainers failed to express a positive view of the EU (and such a case can be made). They are continuing to make that mistake.
Bottom line is, she has a workable plan, but because of this ridiculous idea that MPs should vote on treaties they've not read or understood, she cannot execute it.
Even that wouldn't be so bad if Parliament had an alternative, but it doesn't.
> Some anecdata:
>
> Out for dinner with 9 colleagues last night, all quite senior. The Euro vote came up over dessert, and not raised by my good self. Much hostility to Corbyn, but strong support for the LDs. I am reconsidering my own inclination to vote Green after Fridays result, as it does look like Remainers will coalesce around the LDs. Even a self described Thatcherite was going that way.
>
> In other news, it is up to Brendan Rogers to make the last day of the PL interesting. I think the odds on Man City beating Leicester are too short at 1.19, I reckon this is value as a lay and Leicester may well get some points. We did draw with Liverpool at Anfield, thrashed Arsenal last week and are one of the few teams to beat Man City this season, when we won 2:1 on Boxing Day.
I did suggest yesterday that the Lib Dems could do very well in the EU elections even beating Brexit Party if the 6 million who petitioned to revoke all endorsed them
My own attitude is that TM has gone too far and no stitch up deal will pass.
I would be content for her to stand down and let one of these brexiteers take on the problem as they will fail just as badly.
I am so annoyed with ERG and the dreadful Farage that my membership of the party is under extreme strain and I may even support a referendum if this impasse continues
The problem is that the Uk govt does not run smoothly when the PM is crap. If it wasn’t for Brexit, May would be pissing off the nation about something else. Why ? Because she’s not very good at being PM.
> > @Foxy said:
> > Some anecdata:
> >
> > Out for dinner with 9 colleagues last night, all quite senior. The Euro vote came up over dessert, and not raised by my good self. Much hostility to Corbyn, but strong support for the LDs. I am reconsidering my own inclination to vote Green after Fridays result, as it does look like Remainers will coalesce around the LDs. Even a self described Thatcherite was going that way.
> >
> > In other news, it is up to Brendan Rogers to make the last day of the PL interesting. I think the odds on Man City beating Leicester are too short at 1.19, I reckon this is value as a lay and Leicester may well get some points. We did draw with Liverpool at Anfield, thrashed Arsenal last week and are one of the few teams to beat Man City this season, when we won 2:1 on Boxing Day.
>
> I did suggest yesterday that the Lib Dems could do very well in the EU elections even beating Brexit Party if the 6 million who petitioned to revoke all endorsed them
>
> My own attitude is that TM has gone too far and no stitch up deal will pass.
>
> I would be content for her to stand down and let one of these brexiteers take on the problem as they will fail just as badly.
>
> I am so annoyed with ERG and the dreadful Farage that my membership of the party is under extreme strain and I may even support a referendum if this impasse continues
A party stuck with a divisive leader, held hostage by one strand of opinion, talking to itself and no way out. You have my sympathy.
> > @edmundintokyo said:
>
> > > @Morris_Dancer said:
>
> > > Good morning, everyone.
>
> > > Lack of foresight when making constitutional changes has been something of a habit for a complacent political class.
>
> > Was there a lack of foresight? The goal was to prevent minority groups that were needed to keep a government in office from getting steamrollered by the PM. It's working.
>
>
>
> I think you are right. At the heart of the problem is that Mrs May and her Conservatives did not win an overall majority in her impetuous general election, and the silly old woman tries to carry on as though she had. She needed to play this situation with intelligence and sensitivity, reaching out from the beginning to the whole of Parliament. Instead, she did everything possible to placate her own hard-liners, and there was never any chance of that line getting through Parliament.
>
> "... reaching out from the beginning to the whole of Parliament."
>
> And how would that have resolved the massive gulf that lies between the hardcore remainers and leavers? What could she have done to bridge the chasm that exists between them, and yet take into account what was feasible from the EU's perspective?
>
> And just to remind you: remain lost. It lost because remainers failed to express a positive view of the EU (and such a case can be made). They are continuing to make that mistake.
If would have been easier to get and progress a cross-party deal at the beginning, when the public was broadly still up for Brexit and the opposition keen to be involved, particularly if the government had set about things in an obviously cross-party way as soon as it lost its majority. Instead, the ensuing nearly two years of futile chaos as the government tried to plough ahead alone, without even the full support of its own side, has poisoned the whole project and it is much more difficult to see a realistic possibility of a cross-party deal now that positions have been entrenched by years of infighting.
> > @IanB2 said:
>
> > An interesting lead, but the instance doesn’t prove the argument. For does anyone believe that a confidence vote would have changed the implacable opposition from the likes of Baker and Francois?
> Which, for those two, is more important; a Conservative Government or a Hard Brexit?
> I suggest the former.
>
> I suspect the latter, unfortunately. They've lost all sense - like Corbynistas only with the great disadvantage that they're in power rather than in the safe irrelevance of opposition.
Of course it’s the latter, which was my point. The ultra Brexiters have always put Brexit before the fortunes of their own party, as we saw during the Major era.
Congratulations to Cyclefree Jnr.
Good job too from his parents I'm sure ..
> > @Big_G_NorthWales said:
> > > @Foxy said:
> > > Some anecdata:
> > >
> > > Out for dinner with 9 colleagues last night, all quite senior. The Euro vote came up over dessert, and not raised by my good self. Much hostility to Corbyn, but strong support for the LDs. I am reconsidering my own inclination to vote Green after Fridays result, as it does look like Remainers will coalesce around the LDs. Even a self described Thatcherite was going that way.
> > >
> > > In other news, it is up to Brendan Rogers to make the last day of the PL interesting. I think the odds on Man City beating Leicester are too short at 1.19, I reckon this is value as a lay and Leicester may well get some points. We did draw with Liverpool at Anfield, thrashed Arsenal last week and are one of the few teams to beat Man City this season, when we won 2:1 on Boxing Day.
> >
> > I did suggest yesterday that the Lib Dems could do very well in the EU elections even beating Brexit Party if the 6 million who petitioned to revoke all endorsed them
> >
> > My own attitude is that TM has gone too far and no stitch up deal will pass.
> >
> > I would be content for her to stand down and let one of these brexiteers take on the problem as they will fail just as badly.
> >
> > I am so annoyed with ERG and the dreadful Farage that my membership of the party is under extreme strain and I may even support a referendum if this impasse continues
>
> A party stuck with a divisive leader, held hostage by one strand of opinion, talking to itself and no way out. You have my sympathy.
>
Empathy was the word you were looking for?
> Hmm - but back in the day of Gordon Brown we had a similar state of paralysis - a PM unable to lead, inspire, negotiate, communicate with colleagues and voters, create inspiring policies or even hang on to ministers for long.
>
> The problem is that the Uk govt does not run smoothly when the PM is crap. If it wasn’t for Brexit, May would be pissing off the nation about something else. Why ? Because she’s not very good at being PM.
I don't think things were as bad under Gordon, were they? May's problem is that she's a cradle Conservative. In my experience such people genuinely believe that they and their like are the only true representatives of The People and that anyone who disagrees with them is either deluded or an agent of whatever Foreign Power is the The Enemy of the moment.
Gordon Brown's problem was that Blair held on too long.
> > @Big_G_NorthWales said:
> > > @Foxy said:
> > > Some anecdata:
> > >
> > > Out for dinner with 9 colleagues last night, all quite senior. The Euro vote came up over dessert, and not raised by my good self. Much hostility to Corbyn, but strong support for the LDs. I am reconsidering my own inclination to vote Green after Fridays result, as it does look like Remainers will coalesce around the LDs. Even a self described Thatcherite was going that way.
> > >
> > > In other news, it is up to Brendan Rogers to make the last day of the PL interesting. I think the odds on Man City beating Leicester are too short at 1.19, I reckon this is value as a lay and Leicester may well get some points. We did draw with Liverpool at Anfield, thrashed Arsenal last week and are one of the few teams to beat Man City this season, when we won 2:1 on Boxing Day.
> >
> > I did suggest yesterday that the Lib Dems could do very well in the EU elections even beating Brexit Party if the 6 million who petitioned to revoke all endorsed them
> >
> > My own attitude is that TM has gone too far and no stitch up deal will pass.
> >
> > I would be content for her to stand down and let one of these brexiteers take on the problem as they will fail just as badly.
> >
> > I am so annoyed with ERG and the dreadful Farage that my membership of the party is under extreme strain and I may even support a referendum if this impasse continues
>
> A party stuck with a divisive leader, held hostage by one strand of opinion, talking to itself and no way out. You have my sympathy.
>
As mirrored in labour and the useless Corbyn. What a mess
> I note noone (On Twitter) is actually trying to persuade the other side in this debate now.
No, that ship has sailed, it's identity politics now.
Important milestones. Have a great day
> Of course it’s the latter, which was my point. The ultra Brexiters have always put Brexit before the fortunes of their own party, as we saw during the Major era.
>
> I don't know about you, but they're starting to remind me of the Ultras who plagued the life out of Wellington in the late 1820s - threatening to do absolutely anything up to and including voting for parliamentary reform in order to block Catholic emancipation.
History repeats itself, I see. Is this the first time, hence tragedy or the second, hence farce.
> > @Pulpstar said:
> > I note noone (On Twitter) is actually trying to persuade the other side in this debate now.
>
> No, that ship has sailed, it's identity politics now.
There is a horrible trend labelling everyone that disagrees with you extreme or ultra. Utterly dismissive that other opinions exist. Feels very broken.
> Thank you for an interesting article @AlastairMeeks.
>
> Off topic, today my youngest is 21. This is very significant for him but also feels like a milestone for me and his father.
>
> He is revising furiously for his finals, having just finished his dissertation on the growth of populism in Italy. A future PB'er in the making....?
>
> Congratulations on completing the first stage of parenthood! My parents will say that the next stage is much easier
Indeed; he will shortly come to appreciate how much wisdom you and his father have recently acquired, having been sadly mistaken so often during his teenage years
I'll agree that cock-up is usually far more likely than conspiracy but this problem arose when Parliament demanded a final say while having a majority against Brexit, any Brexit.
If the Scots voted 52 - 48 for independence, would the same demand be set, Would there be a majority in the HoC for them to split away? I doubt it.
The EU agreed a deal with the UK government. It might be a poor deal, a failure of negotiation on our side, but Parliament has shown it always wants the final say, even if that verdict should be for the electorate. To honour the referendum result, that deal should and could have been agreed much earlier and put to the electorate as EU deal vs leave with no deal.
The insistence on a second chance for Remain has shown the futility of referenda when MPs disagree. Why is wee Jimmy insisting on another Scottish one? I had a choice in these elections of voting for Tories, Labour or an independent. Had Vlad the Impaler stood as an independent, I would have voted for him. Possibly, even a Green - something I never thought I'd ever say.
https://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2019/05/dinah-glover-the-prime-minister-lacks-empathy-negotiates-badly-and-doesnt-lead-the-conservative-party-needs-to-get-her-out-now.html
https://twitter.com/DanielJHannan/status/1112608964053745669
> > @Pulpstar said:
> > I note noone (On Twitter) is actually trying to persuade the other side in this debate now.
>
> No, that ship has sailed, it's identity politics now.
Persuasion is overrated. For many, it's always been identity politics:
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/02/27/why-facts-dont-change-our-minds
Where I do agree with Alastair is that there was a constitutional consensus in those days that a government that could not get its main business through Parliament was no government at all and had to go for the good of the country. But most of us still think that and we are right. This zombie government should not be clinging to power. But the FTPA is not the problem, its the willingness of government ministers to hold office but not govern. It needs to end.
> Any threat that Major made was of self inflicted utter devastation of the Conservative party (as ultimately happened in 1997 of course). Was an election really a credible threat? It seems to have swung very few votes.
>
> The threat was part of his 1995 leadership gambit. It was just enough to save his leadership. Whether that was a good thing is another question, of course.
Yes but that was after Maastricht had passed. The reality he faced by that time was similar to May's in that he had no working majority to speak of. The leadership gambit kept him in office but not in power. He could not rely on the same strand of his own party that May cannot rely on today.
The Tories should have risked a split by withdrawing the whip from the likes of Cash then. Had they done so May would be in a slightly happier place although I take your point that she would be screwing up something else.
Johnson- the worst foreign minister in 200 years. Grayling, probably the worst minister in 200 years. Gove- Murdoch's man in cabinet. Rees Mogg- "not for public disclosure" etc. etc. etc.
So the constitutional crisis is really a Conservative crisis. Cameron brought them back from a near death experience whereas May seems to be taking the nasty party straight up to the light and beyond the bourne from which no traveler returns. Mind you she has had a massive amount of help from her own side.
Only Jeremy Corbyn stands between the Tories and annihilation...
> I note noone (On Twitter) is actually trying to persuade the other side in this debate now.
>
> Sadly so. For all this talk of customs unions in the last couple of weeks, how many people are actually weighing up the positives and negatives of that arrangement?
>
> https://twitter.com/DanielJHannan/status/1112608964053745669
I agree with his analysis but I frankly no longer care. If a CU is what it takes to achieve Brexit and get out of this mess I would pay that price. At the moment our MPs are giving us the worst of all possible worlds, paying the price of being in but getting none of the benefits whilst living in a world of uncertainty and confusion. It is remarkable that is not doing even more damage than it is.
I would add a smiley but unfortunately it isn't funny.
It took from the 1620s to 1689 to get to a reasonably enduring settlement about the relationship between crown, government and parliament. We are now in a process of trying to reconfigure that relationship (the post EU one) while (a) working out how to leave and (b) having a fight as to whether we should leave at all. My sense is that the crisis, well described by Alastair Meeks and much compounded by the FTPA, is part of a long process of working out what it is like to be a sovereign power in practice as well as in name. I cannot see why this turmoil should be a brief one.
The insoluble problem is that of entering far too deeply, step by step, into an alternative sovereignty arrangement without specific mandated and authentic consent as we went along. Sovereignty issues require referendums.
Finally, the FTPA requirement of a two thirds majority for the commons to call for an early election does not make sense to me. This plus the PMs lack of ability to call one creates a blockage which hinders democracy. 50% +1 should be enough. This won't help at the moment, as long as the commons, with its recent history of not having enough to take seriously, can vote down the government's central policy time after time and declare confidence in the same government. Get ready for a long haul.
All you need to do is hold and win a referendum. Future parliaments, de facto, are seemingly bound to implement the result, no matter what changes.
> One major constitutional change equally (perhaps more) significant is that parliaments can now bind their successors.
>
> All you need to do is hold and win a referendum. Future parliaments, de facto, are seemingly bound to implement the result, no matter what changes.
I hadn't noticed this parliament feeling bound to do so at all.
> Gavin Williamson seems to attract mixed feelings: you either hate him or you loathe him. The problem is being a vain and shallow bullshitter is not unique to him... there really seems no end to the talents of the Conservatives House of Commons in this regard.
>
> FTFY.
>
> I would add a smiley but unfortunately it isn't funny.
No, the humour in this died several months ago. A pox on all their houses seemed to me to be as close to a consensus as the Locals produced.
> > @Jonathan said:
> > One major constitutional change equally (perhaps more) significant is that parliaments can now bind their successors.
> >
> > All you need to do is hold and win a referendum. Future parliaments, de facto, are seemingly bound to implement the result, no matter what changes.
>
> I hadn't noticed this parliament feeling bound to do so at all.
>
>
Oh come on , the pro Brexit argument still standing , is to “respect the 2016 vote”. It’s what drives May and Corbyn.
Unless BP take more from lab than Con I'd assume a comfortable but not huge win for lab.
> > @Sandpit said:
> > I note noone (On Twitter) is actually trying to persuade the other side in this debate now.
> >
> > Sadly so. For all this talk of customs unions in the last couple of weeks, how many people are actually weighing up the positives and negatives of that arrangement?
> >
> > https://twitter.com/DanielJHannan/status/1112608964053745669
>
> I agree with his analysis but I frankly no longer care. If a CU is what it takes to achieve Brexit and get out of this mess I would pay that price. At the moment our MPs are giving us the worst of all possible worlds, paying the price of being in but getting none of the benefits whilst living in a world of uncertainty and confusion. It is remarkable that is not doing even more damage than it is.
Why do free trade associations exist? Why does the EU exist if it is so bad for business? There are a number of countries who prosper outside any meaningful trade block but the vast majority of business and wealth exists within one of the big trade areas. If Japan was doing better I might believe in a stand-alone option but even japan is being squashed by the big USA and Chinese companies principally who can rely on a massive home market
> Indeed; he will shortly come to appreciate how much wisdom you and his father have recently acquired, having been sadly mistaken so often during his teenage years
>
> You are Samuel Longhorne Clemens and I claim my £5.
$5 surely?
My sons are now seeking my advice on 'managing teenagers'.
Personally I am trying not to allow desire for a resolution to this phase, any resolution, see be accept any option, but the optimist in me says it cannot possibly be as bad as people say and that our political parties agreeing something would be a miracle worth seeing.
> > @Sandpit said:
>
> > I note noone (On Twitter) is actually trying to persuade the other side in this debate now.
>
> >
>
> > Sadly so. For all this talk of customs unions in the last couple of weeks, how many people are actually weighing up the positives and negatives of that arrangement?
>
> >
>
> > https://twitter.com/DanielJHannan/status/1112608964053745669
>
>
>
>
>
> I agree with his analysis but I frankly no longer care. If a CU is what it takes to achieve Brexit and get out of this mess I would pay that price. At the moment our MPs are giving us the worst of all possible worlds, paying the price of being in but getting none of the benefits whilst living in a world of uncertainty and confusion. It is remarkable that is not doing even more damage than it is.
>
> Customs Union will not get through , it is even worse than May's deal on its own and more stupid as well. Excuse the use of poor grammar, I have an 8 year old desperate to show me computer games.
Listen well, young padwa. You have much to learn.
I suspect most people like the economics and dislike the politics of the EU, but those two things are inextricably linked thanks to EU ideology being inflexible towards heretical views, and the trend is one of unending integration.
If the vote had been solely on a free trade association, I imagine Remain would've won by a landslide.
> > @Sandpit said:
> > I note noone (On Twitter) is actually trying to persuade the other side in this debate now.
> >
> > Sadly so. For all this talk of customs unions in the last couple of weeks, how many people are actually weighing up the positives and negatives of that arrangement?
> >
> > https://twitter.com/DanielJHannan/status/1112608964053745669
>
> I agree with his analysis but I frankly no longer care. If a CU is what it takes to achieve Brexit and get out of this mess I would pay that price. At the moment our MPs are giving us the worst of all possible worlds, paying the price of being in but getting none of the benefits whilst living in a world of uncertainty and confusion. It is remarkable that is not doing even more damage than it is.
May and Corbyn might reach an agreement but, given past experiences, it seems more likely that Parliament will continue to blunder along in a state of complete paralysis, and we'll have a re-run of the cliff-edge panic at the back end of October.
After all, it's not simply a matter of the huge numbers of irreconcilable Continuity Remain and Hard Brexit MPs. Any agreement at all brings with it the substantial risk, perhaps even the likelihood, of a realignment that brings an end to the two party system in its current form. It's hard to imagine any result other than a Hard Brexit forestalling a major split on the Right (with some kind of mass defection of voters, Conservative activists and possibly sitting Tory MPs to the Brexit Party,) whilst Labour is damned both ways. If it facilitates any kind of Brexit then it will haemorrhage support to the Lib Dems and Greens, and can kiss goodbye to any (already remote) prospect of a revival in Scotland; if it goes all-out for Remain then it could suffer a devastating rout across the North, with every seat that doesn't contain a large concentration of very hard Left and/or ethnic minority voters potentially coming into play. Northern Labour appears nigh-on impregnable at Westminster level, but so did Scottish Labour until the 2014 referendum disrupted everything.
In short, whichever way this ends, the risk for both of the current main parties of Government is that they are so badly damaged by the fallout that they can never hope to win a Commons majority again, Which is why they won't let it end. If Theresa May could get the EU27 to agree an extension lasting a hundred years then she would do it.
> > @DavidL said:
> > > @Sandpit said:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > I agree with his analysis but I frankly no longer care. If a CU is what it takes to achieve Brexit and get out of this mess I would pay that price. At the moment our MPs are giving us the worst of all possible worlds, paying the price of being in but getting none of the benefits whilst living in a world of uncertainty and confusion. It is remarkable that is not doing even more damage than it is.
>
> Why do free trade associations exist? Why does the EU exist if it is so bad for business? There are a number of countries who prosper outside any meaningful trade block but the vast majority of business and wealth exists within one of the big trade areas. If Japan was doing better I might believe in a stand-alone option but even japan is being squashed by the big USA and Chinese companies principally who can rely on a massive home market
I think that you are not distinguishing between free trade and a CU. The problem with the latter is that it requires far more regulation and central control than a simple free trade agreement. It doesn't just affect the bilateral arrangements, as a FTA does but relationships with third parties. The concern is that those third party arrangements would not be designed for our benefit. I take the point that it should not necessarily be assumed that we would do any better on our own of course.
> I, along with many others, wondered what the purpose of the six-months extension was when Mrs May trotted off to Brussels. No answer then, and none now. Letting it all stew for a while seems to be the answer.
>
> We've seen how popular that is. Those view will be reinforced on the 23rd. Does anyone else think there must be a cunning plan emerging before then that is neither cunning nor planned?
I think we have a denoucement coming up on the cross-party talks. They will either succeed or fail shortly.
And congratulations Cyclefree and Cyclefree fils!
> > @DavidL said:
> > > @Sandpit said:
> > > I note noone (On Twitter) is actually trying to persuade the other side in this debate now.
> > >
> > > Sadly so. For all this talk of customs unions in the last couple of weeks, how many people are actually weighing up the positives and negatives of that arrangement?
> > >
> > > https://twitter.com/DanielJHannan/status/1112608964053745669
> >
> > I agree with his analysis but I frankly no longer care. If a CU is what it takes to achieve Brexit and get out of this mess I would pay that price. At the moment our MPs are giving us the worst of all possible worlds, paying the price of being in but getting none of the benefits whilst living in a world of uncertainty and confusion. It is remarkable that is not doing even more damage than it is.
>
> Why do free trade associations exist? Why does the EU exist if it is so bad for business? There are a number of countries who prosper outside any meaningful trade block but the vast majority of business and wealth exists within one of the big trade areas. If Japan was doing better I might believe in a stand-alone option but even japan is being squashed by the big USA and Chinese companies principally who can rely on a massive home market
Japan is struggling for exactly the same reason Italy is: demographics.
And of course polling was not always good for Labour, and if they were worried about what might happen in the euros agreement could have been reached in time to cancel them. Now it is too late might as well wait.
> Customs Union will not get through , it is even worse than May's deal on its own and more stupid as well. Excuse the use of poor grammar, I have an 8 year old desperate to show me computer games.
>
> Being worse and more stupid is no reason it wont get through. It won't get through because likely a majority of MPs still hope to achieve their primary goal whatever that is. If only leavers or only remainers were getting mad we could call it panic at losing but none seem to like it.
>
> Personally I am trying not to allow desire for a resolution to this phase, any resolution, see be accept any option, but the optimist in me says it cannot possibly be as bad as people say and that our political parties agreeing something would be a miracle worth seeing.
Ultimately, there is no emotional engagement with the idea of a Customs Union. Being in one, or not being in one, will be a matter of relatively little import compared to being a member (or not) of the European Union.
If we were in a Customs Union, and it wasn't working for us, we'd leave. And if we weren't in one, and Dr Fox was still in charge of our trade arrangements with the rest of the world, we'd probably join.
I don't think being in a Customs Union is a particularly great idea. But nor is it that awful. The EU has been good at forging trade deals with - in the recent past - Japan, Canada and Mexico. So long as we could piggy back on these (and it would require work to make sure that happened), it would be no disaster, even if the EU negotiators making future deals paid little heed to our specific needs.
But this isn't really about what's best. It's really about whether one thinks that the UK is best off properly severed from the EU. There is a case to be made for that. But we don't hear it. Instead, we hear that x or y or z is no different from being an EU member. It's Project Fear in reverse: it's Project This Would Be No Change Ignoring All The Actual Change.
> https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1124788878727102464
>
>
>
> Is this another situation where no. 10 tries to bounce someone into agreeing something by leaking that agreement us close? Thst would be so annoying. > @justin124 said:
>
> > Apparently the Local Election results for the wards within the Peterborough constituency came up with this:
>
> >
>
> > Lab: 35% (-13)
>
> > Con: 31% (-16)
>
> > LDem: 11% (+8)
>
> > UKIP: 8% (+8)
>
> > Grn: 6% (+4)
>
> > Other: 9% (+9)
>
>
>
> Looks like Lab hold on reduced majority to me.
>
>
>
>
>
> Reduced majority? It is already a tiny one.
>
> Unless BP take more from lab than Con I'd assume a comfortable but not huge win for lab.
If the Brexit Party win the European elections the momentum will very likely ensure the Brexit Party then win the Peterborough by election 2 weeks later, indeed the Brexit Party will almost certainly have won the Peterbrough local authority area on May 23rd if they do so so voters in the area will already have got used to voting Brexit Party.
Peterborough was 60% Leave and full of voters furious we are still in the EU, the fact both Labour and the Tories were down in Peterborough in the local elections and it was no overall control is also an ideal circumstance for a Brexit Party win.
> What is with all the arrows in the block quotes? The threads are becoming unreadable.
Seems to be a vanilla upgrade. Until it's fixed we need people to relearn the old-school art of trimming and only quote the sentence or two they're responding to.
Like so many of her decisions, it was crap.
> Elegant, well-researched article. I like the PB tradition that Sunday articles are more reflective than the transient pleasure of pieces on whether the market on the next Peterborough winner is well-priced.
Vintage PBers will recall your previous moniker as NickPalmerMP. Will your new status induce NickPalmerCouncillor ?
And congratulations on your elevation to ruler rather than ruled ...
> Could Jeremy Corbyn save the Conservative Party by agreeing a deal? On the basis we are often our own worst enemy it would be fitting.
Looking at Thursday's council election results, Labour retained 96% of their seat total.
Losses in metropolitan areas like Liverpool, Manchester, Sheffield, Leeds were minimal - just the odd seat here and there. 'Labour leave' areas like Sunderland, Middlesbrough, Stockton, Ashfield, Bolsover etc were notably less supportive.
There are a bloc of 20-30 Labour MPs all sitting in Leave constituencies who need a deal or they will be at risk. Corbyn can afford to shed huge amounts of votes in certain parts of the big cities and still retain the seats.
Furthermore, Labour remain 100 or so short of a majority (after defections/deselections). Where are they getting these extra seats from to form a government?
If he doesn't deal, how does he find a way to win? How does he find a way to spread the Labour vote more effectively rather than piling up 80% of the vote in zone 1-3 London? Most seats voted Leave.
If Labour had supported May's deal, would they have been in power by now?
The options after the referendum result were talked about as ranging from "hard" to "soft" Brexit. In those far-off days didn't "hard" Brexit mean something like May's deal, and "soft" Brexit mean remaining in the Customs Union and Single Market? Now anything except a Brexit with no deal at all is talked of as "Brexit in name only", and nobody is talking about staying in the Single Market (despite it being the most rational and obvious compromise).
On the other hand, ending up staying in the EU seemed like a very long shot in those days, whereas now it seems like a real possibility (tho still not favourite). BUT I think for several of the "hard" brexiters, staying in the EU is actually their preferred option (or at least 2nd), as it helps their nasty nationalist stabbed-in-the-back betrayal rhetoric and personal ambitions.
Therefore many of the "hard" brexiters are actually pretty cunning operators, and not as dumb as they look (of course it helps to have billionaire foreign/tax-dodging press barons hysterically supporting you, not matter how ridiculous you are).