We don't have a coalition government *just because* one part of the country voted for a different party. The same applies to UK referendum results.
So it's the "will of the province" when it suits you and then an imperialistic land grab when it also suits?
No. The province can choose to leave the UK at will or remain in the UK at will.
The province can also elect representatives to Parliamentary bodies that shape its laws and make decisions. Except it can't if the backstop goes through, then it will be a colony.
FPT
Just to understand your issues with the back stop:
1. The legitimacy of NI being subject to regulations they have no input in shaping 2. The concern about some form of regulatory checks between GB and NI
Both are reasonable and valid concerns. Couldn’t they be resolved by:
1. Allowing NI to elect MEPs while the backstop is in force* 2. Asking the people of NI to choose between No Deal & a hard border and Deal with limited checks between them and GB? **
* arguably GB should also elect MEPs while the U.K.-wide backstop is in force
** NB this is a recognition of the unique circumstances of NI and not a concession on a U.K.-wide second referendum so don’t waste OGH’s server storage
Polling seems to demonstrate that around two thirds of the NI electorate are not massively bothered by either 1 or 2, if it comes to a choice between the WA and No Deal.
If all that’s at issue were the consent of the NI electorate, the WA would have passed long ago.
Yep - Remainers solution.
Triggering the backstop? I thought it was an automatic procedure.
It is - to protect the interests of NI. But if you leave the decision to the people of NI then that is no longer an issue. Let them decide if they want a customs border on the island of Ireland or in the Irish Sea.
Unless you get the wrong answer.
The system in NI remains a bit mad but it works. Tinker with it at your peril.
Northern Ireland has made clear time and again what it wants. Given how precious our Union is to the Conservative party, maybe it should trust the people of Northern Ireland.
As I said it's best to leave sleeping dogs lie in NI.
We don't have a coalition government *just because* one part of the country voted for a different party. The same applies to UK referendum results.
So it's the "will of the province" when it suits you and then an imperialistic land grab when it also suits?
No. The province can choose to leave the UK at will or remain in the UK at will.
The province can also elect representatives to Parliamentary bodies that shape its laws and make decisions. Except it can't if the backstop goes through, then it will be a colony.
FPT
Just to understand your issues with the back stop:
1. The legitimacy of NI being subject to regulations they have no input in shaping 2. The concern about some form of regulatory checks between GB and NI
Both are reasonable and valid concerns. Couldn’t they be resolved by:
1. Allowing NI to elect MEPs while the backstop is in force* 2. Asking the people of NI to choose between No Deal & a hard border and Deal with limited checks between them and GB? **
* arguably GB should also elect MEPs while the U.K.-wide backstop is in force
** NB this is a recognition of the unique circumstances of NI and not a concession on a U.K.-wide second referendum so don’t waste OGH’s server storage
Yes those are exactly my concerns. And those are fine solutions.
1. I would expand and say that NI must have not just MEPs but representation on the European Council too. Maybe allow Arlene Foster and the NI executive to take the place of the UK in the Council. Granting Foster veto powers where May previously would have had them.
Megha Mohan, BBC Gender and Identity correspondent
wtf!
That acronym is the non-politically correct version of the job title.
Who rather that wot?
Like the old joke - whereas a psychologist asks "how are you?", an existential phenomenologist asks "are you?"
Heard joke once: Man goes to doctor. Says he's depressed. Says life seems harsh and cruel. Says he feels all alone in threatening world where what lies ahead is vague and uncertain.
Doctor says, "Treatment is simple. The great blogger Mike Smithson is online tonight. Go and read politicalbetting.com. That should pick you up." Man bursts into tears. Says "But Doctor... I am Mike Smithson!"
Good joke. Everybody laugh. Roll on snare drum. Curtains.
If only it were curtains for your attempts at humour Sunil!
I thought it was quite witty. All in the eye of the beholder, granted.
As I said it's best to leave sleeping dogs lie in NI.
It's ironic that as Brexit is causing the Ulsterisation of English politics, in Northern Ireland it seems to be driving an unprecedented rise of non-sectarian forces.
We don't have a coalition government *just because* one part of the country voted for a different party. The same applies to UK referendum results.
So it's the "will of the province" when it suits you and then an imperialistic land grab when it also suits?
No. The province can choose to leave the UK at will or remain in the UK at will.
The province can also elect representatives to Parliamentary bodies that shape its laws and make decisions. Except it can't if the backstop goes through, then it will be a colony.
FPT
Just to understand your issues with the back stop:
1. The legitimacy of NI being subject to regulations they have no input in shaping 2. The concern about some form of regulatory checks between GB and NI
Both are reasonable and valid concerns. Couldn’t they be resolved by:
1. Allowing NI to elect MEPs while the backstop is in force* 2. Asking the people of NI to choose between No Deal & a hard border and Deal with limited checks between them and GB? **
* arguably GB should also elect MEPs while the U.K.-wide backstop is in force
** NB this is a recognition of the unique circumstances of NI and not a concession on a U.K.-wide second referendum so don’t waste OGH’s server storage
Yes those are exactly my concerns. And those are fine solutions.
1. I would expand and say that NI must have not just MEPs but representation on the European Council too. Maybe allow Arlene Foster and the NI executive to take the place of the UK in the Council. Granting Foster veto powers where May previously would have had them.
Basically, NI becomes a "country" in the EU. So much for the indivisibility of the UK, then.
In the event that No Deal happens, and goes badly wrong, how many deaths definitely attributable to disruption of medical supplies could the prime minister survive?
We don't have a coalition government *just because* one part of the country voted for a different party. The same applies to UK referendum results.
So it's the "will of the province" when it suits you and then an imperialistic land grab when it also suits?
No. The province can choose to leave the UK at will or remain in the UK at will.
The province can also elect representatives to Parliamentary bodies that shape its laws and make decisions. Except it can't if the backstop goes through, then it will be a colony.
FPT
Just to understand your issues with the back stop:
1. The legitimacy of NI being subject to regulations they have no input in shaping 2. The concern about some form of regulatory checks between GB and NI
Both are reasonable and valid concerns. Couldn’t they be resolved by:
1. Allowing NI to elect MEPs while the backstop is in force* 2. Asking the people of NI to choose between No Deal & a hard border and Deal with limited checks between them and GB? **
* arguably GB should also elect MEPs while the U.K.-wide backstop is in force
** NB this is a recognition of the unique circumstances of NI and not a concession on a U.K.-wide second referendum so don’t waste OGH’s server storage
Yes those are exactly my concerns. And those are fine solutions.
1. I would expand and say that NI must have not just MEPs but representation on the European Council too. Maybe allow Arlene Foster and the NI executive to take the place of the UK in the Council. Granting Foster veto powers where May previously would have had them.
Basically, NI becomes a "country" in the EU. So much for the indivisibility of the UK, then.
On condition of 2 ... that NI votes for it.
If NI votes for it, and if they have representation then I am ok with it.
If they don't have representatives and if they don't vote for it I'm not.
To Make Final Two Void if no MP vote resulting in a final pairing. Boris Johnson 2/7 Jeremy Hunt 1/2 Michael Gove 3/1 Sajid Javid 6/1 Andrea Leadsom 8/1 Dominic Raab 10/1 Rory Stewart 10/1 Esther McVey 50/1 Matt Hancock 50/1 Mark Harper 100/1
We don't have a coalition government *just because* one part of the country voted for a different party. The same applies to UK referendum results.
So it's the "will of the province" when it suits you and then an imperialistic land grab when it also suits?
No. The province can choose to leave the UK at will or remain in the UK at will.
The province can also elect representatives to Parliamentary bodies that shape its laws and make decisions. Except it can't if the backstop goes through, then it will be a colony.
FPT
Just to understand your issues with the back stop:
1. The legitimacy of NI being subject to regulations they have no input in shaping 2. The concern about some form of regulatory checks between GB and NI
Both are reasonable and valid concerns. Couldn’t they be resolved by:
1. Allowing NI to elect MEPs while the backstop is in force* 2. Asking the people of NI to choose between No Deal & a hard border and Deal with limited checks between them and GB? **
* arguably GB should also elect MEPs while the U.K.-wide backstop is in force
** NB this is a recognition of the unique circumstances of NI and not a concession on a U.K.-wide second referendum so don’t waste OGH’s server storage
Had the May administration not been dependent on the DUP for S&C, then I suspect there would have been a referendum in Northern Ireland.
I wonder if a referendum there is on Boris's agenda.
Yep, a referendum solves it. Do you think the ERG would vote for that?
A referendum doesn't solve it unless they have representation. You can't vote to make yourself irreversibly a colony. You can't elect a party that will abolish elections.
Betting Post somewhat related to this. I have put a £5 on Matt Hancock at 20/1 to have the fewest votes. Rationale here is part because he seems to have sunk without trace in the past few days and lost momentum but also because he is fishing in the same pool as Rory Stewart and I suspect the more pro-Remain MPs may look to give Rory a boost in the first round to create perceived momentum, thus taking support from Hancock.
We don't have a coalition government *just because* one part of the country voted for a different party. The same applies to UK referendum results.
So it's the "will of the province" when it suits you and then an imperialistic land grab when it also suits?
No. The province can choose to leave the UK at will or remain in the UK at will.
The province can also elect representatives to Parliamentary bodies that shape its laws and make decisions. Except it can't if the backstop goes through, then it will be a colony.
FPT
Just to understand your issues with the back stop:
1. The legitimacy of NI being subject to regulations they have no input in shaping 2. The concern about some form of regulatory checks between GB and NI
Both are reasonable and valid concerns. Couldn’t they be resolved by:
1. Allowing NI to elect MEPs while the backstop is in force* 2. Asking the people of NI to choose between No Deal & a hard border and Deal with limited checks between them and GB? **
* arguably GB should also elect MEPs while the U.K.-wide backstop is in force
** NB this is a recognition of the unique circumstances of NI and not a concession on a U.K.-wide second referendum so don’t waste OGH’s server storage
Had the May administration not been dependent on the DUP for S&C, then I suspect there would have been a referendum in Northern Ireland.
I wonder if a referendum there is on Boris's agenda.
Yep, a referendum solves it. Do you think the ERG would vote for that?
A referendum doesn't solve it unless they have representation. You can't vote to make yourself irreversibly a colony. You can't elect a party that will abolish elections.
If they do not like what is on offer they can vote to reject it.
As I said it's best to leave sleeping dogs lie in NI.
It's ironic that as Brexit is causing the Ulsterisation of English politics, in Northern Ireland it seems to be driving an unprecedented rise of non-sectarian forces.
Yes, the rise of the Alliance Party is rather inspiring, isn't it?
In the event that No Deal happens, and goes badly wrong, how many deaths definitely attributable to disruption of medical supplies could the prime minister survive?
Who knows in the current insane political climate. Probably do a Norman Lamont and say it is a price worth paying.
As I said it's best to leave sleeping dogs lie in NI.
It's ironic that as Brexit is causing the Ulsterisation of English politics, in Northern Ireland it seems to be driving an unprecedented rise of non-sectarian forces.
Yes, the rise of the Alliance Party is rather inspiring, isn't it?
Sister party of the LibDems - not so surprising given their recent rise in Great Britain?
A possible pivot is of course staring us in the face.
Let us remember that the WA *is* leaving. All Boris needs to do is bring his essential Borisness into play by telling the Francois gang just that and to vote it through and Voila!
Could work. Should work. And takes us to where we could have been in November.
6 to 8 months to prepare and we have had over 30 months come Halloween. Do the maths.
So you want Britain to crash out of the EU when it is unprepared, including on stockpiles of medicine?
No I want the UK to be prepared and come Halloween there will be no excuse not to be prepared. So it takes 6-8 months to prepare. So what? It will have been over 40 months to prepare since the Brexit vote It will have been over three years since a PM was elected saying "No Deal is better than a bad deal" It will have been over 30 months since the invocation of Article 50 More cruically though: It will have been over 12 months since mass resignations from the cabinet made it look unlikely that the government could pass the withdrawal agreement. It will have been over 10 months since the vote on the withdrawal agreement was pulled as it would be lost. It will have been over 9 months since the house rejected the Withdrawal Agreement by record margins. So why in that time have 6-8 months of preparations not occured?
So you read about a report from last month that says that Britain will not be ready for 31 October and just decide that it should be so Britain will just have to suffer if it isn't. Right. And they wonder why I call it a death cult.
Tell me please why more than 12 months since it became obvious the WA was doomed the civil service haven't done 6-8 months of preparations? Not fit for the role if that's the case.
The civil service is answerable to its bosses. Who have not been able to agree among themselves. Please stop blaming the civil service.
The civil service have a duty to prepare for all eventualities, including the fall of the government and the opposition taking over. Not just the whims of the government of the day.
Given no deal has been a likely outcome it is a deriliction of duty not to prepare for it.
I thought they were forbidden by the Prime Minister of the day (Mr Cameron) to prepare for a Leave victory in the referendum?
Megha Mohan, BBC Gender and Identity correspondent
wtf!
That acronym is the non-politically correct version of the job title.
Who rather that wot?
Like the old joke - whereas a psychologist asks "how are you?", an existential phenomenologist asks "are you?"
Heard joke once: Man goes to doctor. Says he's depressed. Says life seems harsh and cruel. Says he feels all alone in threatening world where what lies ahead is vague and uncertain.
Doctor says, "Treatment is simple. The great blogger Mike Smithson is online tonight. Go and read politicalbetting.com. That should pick you up." Man bursts into tears. Says "But Doctor... I am Mike Smithson!"
Good joke. Everybody laugh. Roll on snare drum. Curtains.
If only it were curtains for your attempts at humour Sunil!
I thought it was quite witty. All in the eye of the beholder, granted.
Um, thank you! I just, er, borrowed it from "Watchmen"
Boris may well think his best shot is a honeymoon election, running against the supposed spectres of the Commission on the one hand and Corbyn on the other. Then he gets his majority of 170 and is free to do...
6 to 8 months to prepare and we have had over 30 months come Halloween. Do the maths.
So you want Britain to crash out of the EU when it is unprepared, including on stockpiles of medicine?
No I want the UK to be prepared and come Halloween there will be no excuse not to be prepared. So it takes 6-8 months to prepare. So what? It will have been over 40 months to prepare since the Brexit vote It will have been over three years since a PM was elected saying "No Deal is better than a bad deal" It will have been over 30 months since the invocation of Article 50 More cruically though: It will have been over 12 months since mass resignations from the cabinet made it look unlikely that the government could pass the withdrawal agreement. It will have been over 10 months since the vote on the withdrawal agreement was pulled as it would be lost. It will have been over 9 months since the house rejected the Withdrawal Agreement by record margins. So why in that time have 6-8 months of preparations not occured?
So you read about a report from last month that says that Britain will not be ready for 31 October and just decide that it should be so Britain will just have to suffer if it isn't. Right. And they wonder why I call it a death cult.
Tell me please why more than 12 months since it became obvious the WA was doomed the civil service haven't done 6-8 months of preparations? Not fit for the role if that's the case.
The civil service is answerable to its bosses. Who have not been able to agree among themselves. Please stop blaming the civil service.
The civil service have a duty to prepare for all eventualities, including the fall of the government and the opposition taking over. Not just the whims of the government of the day.
Given no deal has been a likely outcome it is a deriliction of duty not to prepare for it.
I thought they were forbidden by the Prime Minister of the day (Mr Cameron) to prepare for a Leave victory in the referendum?
So the groundbreaking quarter percentage point interest rate that Remainers credit with averting an unavoidable immediate recession if we voted Leave and turned hundreds of thousands of job losses into job gains was completely unplanned? Just imagine what could have happened with some planning?
We don't have a coalition government *just because* one part of the country voted for a different party. The same applies to UK referendum results.
So it's the "will of the province" when it suits you and then an imperialistic land grab when it also suits?
No. The province can choose to leave the UK at will or remain in the UK at will.
The province can also elect representatives to Parliamentary bodies that shape its laws and make decisions. Except it can't if the backstop goes through, then it will be a colony.
FPT
Just to understand your issues with the back stop:
1. The legitimacy of NI being subject to regulations they have no input in shaping 2. The concern about some form of regulatory checks between GB and NI
Both are reasonable and valid concerns. Couldn’t they be resolved by:
1. Allowing NI to elect MEPs while the backstop is in force* 2. Asking the people of NI to choose between No Deal & a hard border and Deal with limited checks between them and GB? **
* arguably GB should also elect MEPs while the U.K.-wide backstop is in force
** NB this is a recognition of the unique circumstances of NI and not a concession on a U.K.-wide second referendum so don’t waste OGH’s server storage
Had the May administration not been dependent on the DUP for S&C, then I suspect there would have been a referendum in Northern Ireland.
I wonder if a referendum there is on Boris's agenda.
Yep, a referendum solves it. Do you think the ERG would vote for that?
A referendum doesn't solve it unless they have representation. You can't vote to make yourself irreversibly a colony. You can't elect a party that will abolish elections.
If they do not like what is on offer they can vote to reject it.
So you have no principled objection to a party being elected that abolishes democracy? That abolishes future elections?
We don't have a coalition government *just because* one part of the country voted for a different party. The same applies to UK referendum results.
So it's the "will of the province" when it suits you and then an imperialistic land grab when it also suits?
No. The province can choose to leave the UK at will or remain in the UK at will.
The province can also elect representatives to Parliamentary bodies that shape its laws and make decisions. Except it can't if the backstop goes through, then it will be a colony.
FPT
Just to understand your issues with the back stop:
1. The legitimacy of NI being subject to regulations they have no input in shaping 2. The concern about some form of regulatory checks between GB and NI
Both are reasonable and valid concerns. Couldn’t they be resolved by:
1. Allowing NI to elect MEPs while the backstop is in force* 2. Asking the people of NI to choose between No Deal & a hard border and Deal with limited checks between them and GB? **
* arguably GB should also elect MEPs while the U.K.-wide backstop is in force
** NB this is a recognition of the unique circumstances of NI and not a concession on a U.K.-wide second referendum so don’t waste OGH’s server storage
Yes those are exactly my concerns. And those are fine solutions.
1. I would expand and say that NI must have not just MEPs but representation on the European Council too. Maybe allow Arlene Foster and the NI executive to take the place of the UK in the Council. Granting Foster veto powers where May previously would have had them.
Basically, NI becomes a "country" in the EU. So much for the indivisibility of the UK, then.
On condition of 2 ... that NI votes for it.
If NI votes for it, and if they have representation then I am ok with it.
If they don't have representatives and if they don't vote for it I'm not.
Simple?
I would agree with this solution. But will the DUP and hardcore Unionists go along with it ?
It won't happen, but I'd laugh my head off if Boris was bottom of the ballot.
It baffles me why people are supporting him. Even if you want a Brexit so hard you can only see it via pirate DVDs from the Netherlands, wouldn't you go for someone who has a record for getting things done and keeping commitments, rather than the opposite?
I thought they were forbidden by the Prime Minister of the day (Mr Cameron) to prepare for a Leave victory in the referendum?
So the groundbreaking quarter percentage point interest rate that Remainers credit with averting an unavoidable immediate recession if we voted Leave and turned hundreds of thousands of job losses into job gains was completely unplanned? Just imagine what could have happened with some planning?
Bank of England are independent and did do planning for Brexit.
This covers the new PM calling one straight away, the PM losing a VoNC straight away, and the scenario where the new Con leader clearly doesn’t command a majority in the Commons and Mrs May gets stuck in No. 10 while an election takes place.
This covers the new PM calling one straight away, the PM losing a VoNC straight away, and the scenario where the new Con leader clearly doesn’t command a majority in the Commons and Mrs May gets stuck in No. 10 while an election takes place.
Value bet in my mind, but DYOR.
I can see Boris going for a snap election as soon as he's elected. It's the sort of thing he'd do. I don't think any of the other candidates would risk it.
Good launch by Boris, made clear he still wants a Deal with the EU but unlike May will not take No Deal off the table and made clear the Tories must deliver Brexit Deal or No Deal
He was subdued, even nervous, and managed to be gaff free but has made impossible promises
What promise is impossible?
No deal on 31st October
Not impossible, there are multiple paths to it happening. Just improbable as it stands.
Possible ways.
1: Boris three-line whips for No Deal making it a Confidence motion. Passes. 2: Boris calls an election for a mandate for it. Wins. 3: Boris find a way to avoid asking for an extension. Times out, default out. 4: Macron (or A N Other) vetoes an extension. Times out, default out.
How do you make something a confidence motion in the post-FTPA era?
Say that you are viewing this as a matter of confidence and if the vote fails you are tabling an early election motion the next day and will whip the party to vote in favour of the early election. Whip will be removed from anyone who rebels in either vote.
The election motion requites a 2/3 majority so that would be a completely pointless manoeuvre.
Corbyn would whip in favour, any Labour MPs who broke that whip would have their whip removed.
SNP and DUP probably opposed but its moot.
434 = 2/3rds of 650 (even not taking into account speakers and Sinn Fein).
Tory and Labour alone have 560
Why would Labour whip in favour of an immediate election. This is one of the few times when it would be politically and electorally better to ensure a November election and there would be plausible reasons to do so - for the entertainment of watching Boris fail to deliver on October 31st if nothing else...
Corbyn would look ridiculous to turn down an election. It would be worse than Gordon Brown cancelling the election that never was. Furthermore he couldn't it is just not in his wavelength to reject an election.
There could well be a majority in the HoC for sitting back and watching Johnson negotiate Oct 31st. It would be very much in Labour's interest to have an election after that date rather than before it.
I also expect Johnson is absolutely relying on Parliament blocking No Deal. Then he can saw I tried but parliament stopped me. If they don't I expect him to wet himself
This covers the new PM calling one straight away, the PM losing a VoNC straight away, and the scenario where the new Con leader clearly doesn’t command a majority in the Commons and Mrs May gets stuck in No. 10 while an election takes place.
Value bet in my mind, but DYOR.
I can see Boris going for a snap election as soon as he's elected. It's the sort of thing he'd do. I don't think any of the other candidates would risk it.
If he wants any chance of negotiating a better deal with the EU, it’s the only opportunity he’s got. An election in October a week before the deadline isn’t going to fly.
Boris has reached 85 public endorsements, with 73 still to declare.
What are the odds on him getting less than 85 actual votes on Thursday?!
I would be curious on a market for 'Boris Johnson getting fewer votes in first ballot than public backers via ConHome that morning'. I'd be very surprised though, I really would.
Boris has reached 85 public endorsements, with 73 still to declare.
Pulpstar's list of non-declareds on Monday seemed to me to have a fair number of ERG on it as well, although perhaps it's only because they are all infamous now and stand out like a sore thumb (well, at least in PB circles). Is that still the case?
Good launch by Boris, made clear he still wants a Deal with the EU but unlike May will not take No Deal off the table and made clear the Tories must deliver Brexit Deal or No Deal
He was subdued, even nervous, and managed to be gaff free but has made impossible promises
What promise is impossible?
No deal on 31st October
Not impossible, there are multiple paths to it happening. Just improbable as it stands.
Possible ways.
1: Boris three-line whips for No Deal making it a Confidence motion. Passes. 2: Boris calls an election for a mandate for it. Wins. 3: Boris find a way to avoid asking for an extension. Times out, default out. 4: Macron (or A N Other) vetoes an extension. Times out, default out.
How do you make something a confidence motion in the post-FTPA era?
Say that you are viewing this as a matter of confidence and if the vote fails you are tabling an early election motion the next day and will whip the party to vote in favour of the early election. Whip will be removed from anyone who rebels in either vote.
The election motion requites a 2/3 majority so that would be a completely pointless manoeuvre.
Corbyn would whip in favour, any Labour MPs who broke that whip would have their whip removed.
SNP and DUP probably opposed but its moot.
434 = 2/3rds of 650 (even not taking into account speakers and Sinn Fein).
Tory and Labour alone have 560
Why would Labour whip in favour of an immediate election. This is one of the few times when it would be politically and electorally better to ensure a November election and there would be plausible reasons to do so - for the entertainment of watching Boris fail to deliver on October 31st if nothing else...
Corbyn would look ridiculous to turn down an election. It would be worse than Gordon Brown cancelling the election that never was. Furthermore he couldn't it is just not in his wavelength to reject an election.
There could well be a majority in the HoC for sitting back and watching Johnson negotiate Oct 31st. It would be very much in Labour's interest to have an election after that date rather than before it.
That is overthinking it. Is Corbyn going to say he would rather have a Tory Brexit than an election?
Not sure but given (a) Geordie Greig is pro-Remain (b) Sarah Vine works there and (c) the Mail will hate the Telegraph getting credit for installing a leader, anyone but Boris. Hunt would be my best bet, or Gove...
Corbyn would look ridiculous to turn down an election. It would be worse than Gordon Brown cancelling the election that never was. Furthermore he couldn't it is just not in his wavelength to reject an election.
There could well be a majority in the HoC for sitting back and watching Johnson negotiate Oct 31st. It would be very much in Labour's interest to have an election after that date rather than before it.
While most of the time all parties would want an election - this time that isn't the case.
If Boris fails to deliver Brexit by October 31st the Tory party will be completely destroyed in a subsequent election as TBP would have to stand. So why would you vote for an election where TBP may not stand and your party would be destroyed when if you wait a few weeks TBP will stand and it's the Tory party that would be destroyed.
There could well be a majority in the HoC for sitting back and watching Johnson negotiate Oct 31st. It would be very much in Labour's interest to have an election after that date rather than before it.
I also expect Johnson is absolutely relying on Parliament blocking No Deal. Then he can saw I tried but parliament stopped me.
Then he can have a "Drain the Swamp" election......
We don't have a coalition government *just because* one part of the country voted for a different party. The same applies to UK referendum results.
So it's the "will of the province" when it suits you and then an imperialistic land grab when it also suits?
No. The province can choose to leave the UK at will or remain in the UK at will.
The province can also elect representatives to Parliamentary bodies that shape its laws and make decisions. Except it can't if the backstop goes through, then it will be a colony.
FPT
Just to understand your issues with the back stop:
1. The legitimacy of NI being subject to regulations they have no input in shaping 2. The concern about some form of regulatory checks between GB and NI
Both are reasonable and valid concerns. Couldn’t they be resolved by:
1. Allowing NI to elect MEPs while the backstop is in force* 2. Asking the people of NI to choose between No Deal & a hard border and Deal with limited checks between them and GB? **
* arguably GB should also elect MEPs while the U.K.-wide backstop is in force
** NB this is a recognition of the unique circumstances of NI and not a concession on a U.K.-wide second referendum so don’t waste OGH’s server storage
Had the May administration not been dependent on the DUP for S&C, then I suspect there would have been a referendum in Northern Ireland.
I wonder if a referendum there is on Boris's agenda.
Yep, a referendum solves it. Do you think the ERG would vote for that?
Boris has reached 85 public endorsements, with 73 still to declare.
What are the odds on him getting less than 85 actual votes on Thursday?!
I would be curious on a market for 'Boris Johnson getting fewer votes in first ballot than public backers via ConHome that morning'. I'd be very surprised though, I really would.
I wouldn't be that surprised. Williamson is running BoJo's campaign amongst MPs. To give GW his credit, he was an effective Chief Whip and I am sure he has been using the same tactics in BoJo's campaign. The crucial difference is this ballot is private and not a public vote. So, I would imagine quite a few MPs have said yes to his face but may take a different tack in the vote.
Boris has reached 85 public endorsements, with 73 still to declare.
Pulpstar's list of non-declareds on Monday seemed to me to have a fair number of ERG on it as well, although perhaps it's only because they are all infamous now and stand out like a sore thumb (well, at least in PB circles). Is that still the case?
A fair number of them have declared since then like Bill Cash, but there are still a few to come. Dominic Raab might hope to pick up some more support, from the likes of Christopher Chope and John Redwood.
Boris may well think his best shot is a honeymoon election, running against the supposed spectres of the Commission on the one hand and Corbyn on the other. Then he gets his majority of 170 and is free to do...
what?
It's a huge risk for him. Not least because Labour would undoubtedly include a referendum with a Remain option in its manifesto if Johnson was looking to get a a mandate for No Deal.
Boris has reached 85 public endorsements, with 73 still to declare.
Pulpstar's list of non-declareds on Monday seemed to me to have a fair number of ERG on it as well, although perhaps it's only because they are all infamous now and stand out like a sore thumb (well, at least in PB circles). Is that still the case?
From memory of an Alistair Meeks comment. At 85+ votes - if they all vote that way in secret, may already be enough to make the second ballot.
Boris has reached 85 public endorsements, with 73 still to declare.
What are the odds on him getting less than 85 actual votes on Thursday?!
It would make Tory MPs look like a bunch of liars if that happens. That's one of the reasons I've been taking a keen interest in the public endorsements.
Rory Stewart has only 7 declared backers. Why aren't more MPs publicly supporting him if he's going to do better than expected?
I fear he won't do better than expected, but if he does it might be because the MPs that support him are scared of their local constituency members and of being deselected - which would imply that Rory has even less of a chance with the membership if he makes it that far - or they were quick to support another candidate and don't want the embarrassment of publicly changing support before the candidate they've declared for is forced to withdraw.
There could well be a majority in the HoC for sitting back and watching Johnson negotiate Oct 31st. It would be very much in Labour's interest to have an election after that date rather than before it.
I also expect Johnson is absolutely relying on Parliament blocking No Deal. Then he can saw I tried but parliament stopped me.
Then he can have a "Drain the Swamp" election......
He can try that of course but which ever way you look at it Johnson is going to lose a lot of votes on October 31st so it is worth his opponents holding off for an election till after that date. Allowing him to go to the country before that date allows him to carry on promising unicorns for all.
Boris has reached 85 public endorsements, with 73 still to declare.
What are the odds on him getting less than 85 actual votes on Thursday?!
It would make Tory MPs look like a bunch of liars if that happens. That's one of the reasons I've been taking a keen interest in the public endorsements.
DD experienced a similar drop off in terms of real support back in 2005. What you say and what you do in the privacy of the voting booth are two very different things.
Boris has reached 85 public endorsements, with 73 still to declare.
Pulpstar's list of non-declareds on Monday seemed to me to have a fair number of ERG on it as well, although perhaps it's only because they are all infamous now and stand out like a sore thumb (well, at least in PB circles). Is that still the case?
A fair number of them have declared since then like Bill Cash, but there are still a few to come. Dominic Raab might hope to pick up some more support, from the likes of Christopher Chope and John Redwood.
I think Wikipedia (or someone) had John Redwood in for Esther McVey as well as Philip Holloborne.
That is overthinking it. Is Corbyn going to say he would rather have a Tory Brexit than an election?
He's spent the last two years working pretty hard towards it.
He's spent 2 years saying "I want another election, I want another election". If the PM calls for an election the idea he could say "actually no thanks" is ludicrous.
HoC - Dominic Grieve will VONC if Conservative government forces a no deal.
Funny then that he stood on a no deal is better than a bad deal manifesto.
If he wont be a Tory at an ensuing election. If he defects to Lib Dems do you think he would hold his seat or would the Tories regain it?
I've not read the whole thing in detail, but I can't see that the 2017 manifesto addressed no deal directly. Just says the Tories will negotiate the best deal and pass it.
As for whether he would hold his seat or not, it entirely depends on the vote shares of all 4 main parties. Unknowable at this point, but I'd like the Tories chances or maybe Labour if TBP split the Leave vote. Grieve as an independent or LD would be underdogs imho.
HoC - Dominic Grieve will VONC if Conservative government forces a no deal.
Funny then that he stood on a no deal is better than a bad deal manifesto.
If he wont be a Tory at an ensuing election. If he defects to Lib Dems do you think he would hold his seat or would the Tories regain it?
Country before Party? Alien for a Leaver the concept but it does happen.
In the minds of Leavers every MP should be part of the groupspeak, where everyone is as moronic as Mark Francois. they conveniently forget that all the headbangers defied their party leaders for years, but now the jackboot is on the other foot...
HoC - Dominic Grieve will VONC if Conservative government forces a no deal.
Funny then that he stood on a no deal is better than a bad deal manifesto.
If he wont be a Tory at an ensuing election. If he defects to Lib Dems do you think he would hold his seat or would the Tories regain it?
He may not stand. With the present electoral maelstrom it's difficult to determine save to say that Beaconsfield is one of the safest Tory seats in the country.
Boris may well think his best shot is a honeymoon election, running against the supposed spectres of the Commission on the one hand and Corbyn on the other. Then he gets his majority of 170 and is free to do...
what?
It's a huge risk for him. Not least because Labour would undoubtedly include a referendum with a Remain option in its manifesto if Johnson was looking to get a a mandate for No Deal.
Comments
1. I would expand and say that NI must have not just MEPs but representation on the European Council too. Maybe allow Arlene Foster and the NI executive to take the place of the UK in the Council. Granting Foster veto powers where May previously would have had them.
BF has Rory makes last two at a crazy 4.1
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1feCjt98HJcY9tlc5Zx78ZoSOC2fN-j0vRVFD5eUTbUE/edit#gid=0
Kirstene Hair has endorsed Michael Gove.
https://twitter.com/Kirstene4Angus/status/1138808265775755264
If NI votes for it, and if they have representation then I am ok with it.
If they don't have representatives and if they don't vote for it I'm not.
Simple?
https://sports.ladbrokes.com/en-gb/betting/politics/uk/uk-politics/next-permanent-tory-leader/226303233/
To Make Final Two
Void if no MP vote resulting in a final pairing.
Boris Johnson
2/7
Jeremy Hunt
1/2
Michael Gove
3/1
Sajid Javid
6/1
Andrea Leadsom
8/1
Dominic Raab
10/1
Rory Stewart
10/1
Esther McVey
50/1
Matt Hancock
50/1
Mark Harper
100/1
paddy's and hills both have the market up.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7131781/Boris-launches-Tory-bid-warning-party-DEAD-unless-Brexit-happens.html
I'm being facetious, I agree with you. I would vote Rory, but there's many reasons I'm not a Tory MP.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jun/12/boris-johnson-brexit-general-election
Boris may well think his best shot is a honeymoon election, running against the supposed spectres of the Commission on the one hand and Corbyn on the other.
Then he gets his majority of 170 and is free to do...
what?
It baffles me why people are supporting him. Even if you want a Brexit so hard you can only see it via pirate DVDs from the Netherlands, wouldn't you go for someone who has a record for getting things done and keeping commitments, rather than the opposite?
The shot of it rising through the clouds is like something from a Hollywood movie. Scroll to T=0 and enjoy.
This covers the new PM calling one straight away, the PM losing a VoNC straight away, and the scenario where the new Con leader clearly doesn’t command a majority in the Commons and Mrs May gets stuck in No. 10 while an election takes place.
Value bet in my mind, but DYOR.
I also expect Johnson is absolutely relying on Parliament blocking No Deal. Then he can saw I tried but parliament stopped me. If they don't I expect him to wet himself
If Boris fails to deliver Brexit by October 31st the Tory party will be completely destroyed in a subsequent election as TBP would have to stand. So why would you vote for an election where TBP may not stand and your party would be destroyed when if you wait a few weeks TBP will stand and it's the Tory party that would be destroyed.
At 85+ votes - if they all vote that way in secret, may already be enough to make the second ballot.
If he wont be a Tory at an ensuing election. If he defects to Lib Dems do you think he would hold his seat or would the Tories regain it?
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/05/2017-conservative-manifesto-in-full/
As for whether he would hold his seat or not, it entirely depends on the vote shares of all 4 main parties. Unknowable at this point, but I'd like the Tories chances or maybe Labour if TBP split the Leave vote. Grieve as an independent or LD would be underdogs imho.
Grieve seems to be enjoying grandstanding rather too much for my liking. I don't care for anyone who postures in that way.