If there is a successful VONC under the terms of the FTPA then Corbyn DOES NOT become PM. We wait for a fortnight and if the VONC is not rescinded there is a general election at which Boris would go into as PM.
Corbyn only becomes PM if LAB is in a position after the election to form a government
Thank you Mike for the clarification. I'm not quite sure what David was thinking when he wrote that but he was wrong. As you state, a successful VONC does NOT put Corbyn into No.10 so it's completely wrong to suggest that Cons MPs voting for it are voting for Corbyn as PM. This is a non sequitur. Hopefully anyone reading the piece will realise the error...
Did you even read the piece ? Here’s what David actually said: although the natural consequence of MPs voting to bring down Boris (especially in October), is that they must be prepared to install someone else, and in reality that means Jeremy Corbyn...
IOW he thinks a VONC followed by two weeks of failure to install a temporary PM just isn’t going to happen.
A general election prior to Brexit is a third possibility, I’ll grant, but I agree with David that it is exceedingly unlikely to be through this route.
But *in reality* that does not mean Corbyn. Corbyn doesn't command a majority in the house and neither the Queen nor any of her corgis are going to call him to be PM. At least not before a general election.
David was pointing out the choices for those who wish to prevent no deal Brexit in October. That the likelihood of the House backing a temporary Corbyn government is exceedingly slim, doesn’t invalidate it as a possible option. The chance of somehow engineering a general election to return a new government before the end of October in order to ‘stop Boris’ looks even more unlikely. It is not a real choice for those determined to stop no deal.
I’d agree that a no deal Brexit is looking increasingly likely.
Mr. Observer, oh, I agree entirely if we leave with no deal then Boris will, rightly, get practically all the blame for banging on about it and then going through with it.
But the fact remains that we are where we are because MPs had the opportunity to back a deal (admittedly, a rubbish one) that May negotiated. They declined, by significant margins, three times. And this after most of them opposed leaving the EU but voted to endorse the referendum result.
They've been infantile for years. The ERG are childish, but they're not the only ones.
I totally agree that many people are responsible for where we are today. But it will be the PM who takes us out on No Deal, the MPs who supported him and the electorate who chose him that will own all that happens from 1st November onwards.
Surely if Corbyn blocks Benn becoming PM to stop no deal out of vanity, for example, you can see that remain floating voters are going to blame Labour as well?
Left-leaning Remain voters are pretty much there already. Brexit is not however quite the issue for them that it is for Conservative voters, which helps to explain why Labour's poll ratings have held up above 20%.
I meant to put 'Remainers' but you all knew that anyway by the description.
The ERG mustered around 80 votes, the Labour party,who voted to enact the result mustered over 200 votes, Clearly, it's all the ERG's fault. Nothing to do with the liars then?
When MPs voted to enact the referendum result, they lied. Most had no intention of doing so, but didn't dare come out and say it at the time. Their tactic was delay, delay, delay, and to keep fighting the referendum campaign.
The LDs, being superior beings, didn't bother with any fig leaves.
At heart, many Remainers know that, as do most Leavers. That's why faith in MPs is at historic lows, and likely to remain so.
No, had leavers got behind the deal, it would have carried at the first attempt. What remainers feel now is very different from what they felt in the year or two after the referendum. The utter hash leavers have made of things since then has created a counter-reaction, which is clear from this year's polls and elections.
You are both right.
Lying is perhaps too strong a word but MPs were certainly less than honest with the public about the consequences of the referendum outcome and the alternative ways forward it implied. Otoh, it is certainly true that we would be out by now if Leavers had not bolloxed it up.
They can't blame that on Remainers, no matter how 'diehard'.
Time, and events, have made them 'diehard', that's the point.
For sure, the LibDems were always diehard - but then (as was OFTEN commented on at the time) during 2017 and 2018, they polled very badly (as did UKIP). The majority was willing to accept a compromise, if only politicians had delivered one.
That was the message of the 2017 GE. No majority, no extremes - get together and sort this out. Mrs May and the Tory extremists are to blame for this not happening.
Great piece David. I do think there remains the prospect of Boris calling a General Election - if he puts a vote for dissolution to the House on its return at the beginning of September there is time for a General Election on 17th or 24th October. As has been pointed out No Deal is becoming popular amongst the stupid, so if Bozza offers it I can see him securing the vote from all kinds of non-Tory voters as well as switchers back from Farage.
It is less likely now though than it was - I think Boris has convinced himself that with his usual panache and charm he will be able to either win over the EU or the Commons - he doesn't care which.
As for a national unity government it doesn't matter what Jezbollah wants - he won't be in it. The Commons realises there is a majority of MPs once party divisions are dropped, they appoint one of their own grandees, they govern. And sat alongside each other on the opposition benches are Johnson and Corbyn. Both Tory and Labour Parties will have split apart, but No Deal will have been averted.
Thanks None. I was beginning to think I was the only one to be getting a little confused here.
Thank you too David for a truly excellent piece, even if (perhaps because) not everyone agrees or follows your logic. Thanks too for the many excellent responses. They illustrate why reading PB is as good as if not better than reading even the quality press on the subject.
In short, I get the picture up to and including the VONC. In fact this is what I expect to happen. And I expect it to pass, because ND is the only alternative at that point and there aren't enough nutters in the house to take us into that except by accident (although such an accident remains an ever-present possibility.)
So what next? Here I am really not sure, and perhaps the reason is relly that the anwer depends on timing and other factors (which might include public opinion, Macron, Boris himself and so on.)
So maybe we take it one step at a time.....and very carefully?
All that is in the Act following the successful VONC is a 14-day period, after which if there has been no successful VOC, there is an election.
There isn't really any precedent, so what happens during that 14-day period will be up to discussion between the party leaders and the views of HMQ (in practice the trio of officials who advise her in such circumstances).
I'd expect them to put securing some certainty and stability (at least temporarily) as the priority (one can imagine the state the markets would be in), hence there will be a lot of pressure on MPs to identify a potential new PM and tolerance for several "goes" at forming a government within the 14 days.
Thanks None. I was beginning to think I was the only one to be getting a little confused here.
Thank you too David for a truly excellent piece, even if (perhaps because) not everyone agrees or follows your logic. Thanks too for the many excellent responses. They illustrate why reading PB is as good as if not better than reading even the quality press on the subject.
In short, I get the picture up to and including the VONC. In fact this is what I expect to happen. And I expect it to pass, because ND is the only alternative at that point and there aren't enough nutters in the house to take us into that except by accident (although such an accident remains an ever-present possibility.)
So what next? Here I am really not sure, and perhaps the reason is relly that the anwer depends on timing and other factors (which might include public opinion, Macron, Boris himself and so on.)
So maybe we take it one step at a time.....and very carefully?
'Liars' is not too harsh a word. They had no intention of enacting the result. They could have stood aside and been neutral, but they actively worked to bring powers back to MPs so they had control and could block everything. They knowingly lied.
By comparison, the LD's pledge on tuition fees wasn't a lie. They would have gone through with it had they had the power to do so. Just because you support the lie doesn't make it less of one. When you break faith so obviously with the electorate, there will always be a reckoning.
Mr. Observer, oh, I agree entirely if we leave with no deal then Boris will, rightly, get practically all the blame for banging on about it and then going through with it.
But the fact remains that we are where we are because MPs had the opportunity to back a deal (admittedly, a rubbish one) that May negotiated. They declined, by significant margins, three times. And this after most of them opposed leaving the EU but voted to endorse the referendum result.
They've been infantile for years. The ERG are childish, but they're not the only ones.
I totally agree that many people are responsible for where we are today. But it will be the PM who takes us out on No Deal, the MPs who supported him and the electorate who chose him that will own all that happens from 1st November onwards.
With any luck both the old parties will be blamed for the pretty pass we have been brought to, ushering in new politics for our country.
It’s a process and will take time. Thanks to Jeremy Corbyn, the Tories have one more election victory in them before the grinding reality of post-Brexit England and its international emasculation kicks in. Eventually, though, we will get the changes we desperately need. The fact is that most people are good people. You cannot deceive them perpetually. At some point the dam breaks.
When MPs voted to enact the referendum result, they lied. Most had no intention of doing so, but didn't dare come out and say it at the time. Their tactic was delay, delay, delay, and to keep fighting the referendum campaign.
The LDs, being superior beings, didn't bother with any fig leaves.
At heart, many Remainers know that, as do most Leavers. That's why faith in MPs is at historic lows, and likely to remain so.
No, had leavers got behind the deal, it would have carried at the first attempt. What remainers feel now is very different from what they felt in the year or two after the referendum. The utter hash leavers have made of things since then has created a counter-reaction, which is clear from this year's polls and elections.
You are both right.
Lying is perhaps too strong a word but MPs were certainly less than honest with the public about the consequences of the referendum outcome and the alternative ways forward it implied. Otoh, it is certainly true that we would be out by now if Leavers had not bolloxed it up.
They can't blame that on Remainers, no matter how 'diehard'.
Time, and events, have made them 'diehard', that's the point.
For sure, the LibDems were always diehard - but then (as was OFTEN commented on at the time) during 2017 and 2018, they polled very badly (as did UKIP). The majority was willing to accept a compromise, if only politicians had delivered one.
That was the message of the 2017 GE. No majority, no extremes - get together and sort this out. Mrs May and the Tory extremists are to blame for this not happening.
Later in the day when compromises were sought. It was clear that absolutely no form of brexit was acceptable to the labour front bench.
Thanks None. I was beginning to think I was the only one to be getting a little confused here.
Thank you too David for a truly excellent piece, even if (perhaps because) not everyone agrees or follows your logic. Thanks too for the many excellent responses. They illustrate why reading PB is as good as if not better than reading even the quality press on the subject.
In short, I get the picture up to and including the VONC. In fact this is what I expect to happen. And I expect it to pass, because ND is the only alternative at that point and there aren't enough nutters in the house to take us into that except by accident (although such an accident remains an ever-present possibility.)
So what next? Here I am really not sure, and perhaps the reason is relly that the anwer depends on timing and other factors (which might include public opinion, Macron, Boris himself and so on.)
So maybe we take it one step at a time.....and very carefully?
All that is in the Act following the successful VONC is a 14-day period, after which if there has been no successful VOC, there is an election.
There isn't really any precedent, so what happens during that 14-day period will be up to discussion between the party leaders and the views of HMQ (in practice the trio of officials who advise her in such circumstances).
I'd expect them to put securing some certainty and stability (at least temporarily) as the priority (one can imagine the state the markets would be in), hence there will be a lot of pressure on MPs to identify a potential new PM and tolerance for several "goes" at forming a government within the 14 days.
Yes, thank you Ian. I can see that happening.
I am going to be crossing the Atlantic by sea for a week during late August and another week in mid October, with barely any internet during that period, so it would be good if these could be quiet weeks on the political front, please.
Thanks None. I was beginning to think I was the only one to be getting a little confused here.
Thank you too David for a truly excellent piece, even if (perhaps because) not everyone agrees or follows your logic. Thanks too for the many excellent responses. They illustrate why reading PB is as good as if not better than reading even the quality press on the subject.
In short, I get the picture up to and including the VONC. In fact this is what I expect to happen. And I expect it to pass, because ND is the only alternative at that point and there aren't enough nutters in the house to take us into that except by accident (although such an accident remains an ever-present possibility.)
So what next? Here I am really not sure, and perhaps the reason is relly that the anwer depends on timing and other factors (which might include public opinion, Macron, Boris himself and so on.)
So maybe we take it one step at a time.....and very carefully?
Which quality press is that?
FT's pretty good, and the Economist. The Observer is good in parts and the Guardian has improved out of all recogintion. The Times has its moments and even the Borisograph too.
I've been buying hard copy a bit more lately. \it has pickd up.
Great piece David. I do think there remains the prospect of Boris calling a General Election - if he puts a vote for dissolution to the House on its return at the beginning of September there is time for a General Election on 17th or 24th October. As has been pointed out No Deal is becoming popular amongst the stupid, so if Bozza offers it I can see him securing the vote from all kinds of non-Tory voters as well as switchers back from Farage.
It is less likely now though than it was - I think Boris has convinced himself that with his usual panache and charm he will be able to either win over the EU or the Commons - he doesn't care which.
As for a national unity government it doesn't matter what Jezbollah wants - he won't be in it. The Commons realises there is a majority of MPs once party divisions are dropped, they appoint one of their own grandees, they govern. And sat alongside each other on the opposition benches are Johnson and Corbyn. Both Tory and Labour Parties will have split apart, but No Deal will have been averted.
It's going to be fun*
An election on the 17th / 24th october doesn't allow time for Parliament to be reformed and time for it to have its say and the Gina Miller case states that Parliament must have a say....
As I've said for ages now either Boris goes for a vote on Wednesday / Thursday or an election isn't an option..
When MPs voted to enact the referendum result, they lied. Most had no intention of doing so, but didn't dare come out and say it at the time. Their tactic was delay, delay, delay, and to keep fighting the referendum campaign.
The LDs, being superior beings, didn't bother with any fig leaves.
At heart, many Remainers know that, as do most Leavers. That's why faith in MPs is at historic lows, and likely to remain so.
No, had leavers got behind the deal, it would have carried at the first attempt. What remainers feel now is very different from what they felt in the year or two after the referendum. The utter hash leavers have made of things since then has created a counter-reaction, which is clear from this year's polls and elections.
You are both right.
Lying is perhaps too strong a word but MPs were certainly less than honest with the public about the consequences of the referendum outcome and the alternative ways forward it implied. Otoh, it is certainly true that we would be out by now if Leavers had not bolloxed it up.
They can't blame that on Remainers, no matter how 'diehard'.
Time, and events, have made them 'diehard', that's the point.
For sure, the LibDems were always diehard - but then (as was OFTEN commented on at the time) during 2017 and 2018, they polled very badly (as did UKIP). The majority was willing to accept a compromise, if only politicians had delivered one.
That was the message of the 2017 GE. No majority, no extremes - get together and sort this out. Mrs May and the Tory extremists are to blame for this not happening.
Later in the day when compromises were sought. It was clear that absolutely no form of brexit was acceptable to the labour front bench.
Arguable. In the indicative votes most Labour MPs supported some sort of alternative Brexit option (CU, CM2, their own deal, etc.) whereas it was the Tories (and LDs) who mostly voted against everything on the table.
A few votes different, and a CU/CM2 option could have emerged from that process with a majority, setting subsequent events on a different path. Remember more parliamentary time was earmarked to take the outcome of the Letwin process forward. The question is how Tory and Labour front benches would have reacted to MPs having taken control.
Thanks None. I was beginning to think I was the only one to be getting a little confused here.
Thank you too David for a truly excellent piece, even if (perhaps because) not everyone agrees or follows your logic. Thanks too for the many excellent responses. They illustrate why reading PB is as good as if not better than reading even the quality press on the subject.
In short, I get the picture up to and including the VONC. In fact this is what I expect to happen. And I expect it to pass, because ND is the only alternative at that point and there aren't enough nutters in the house to take us into that except by accident (although such an accident remains an ever-present possibility.)
So what next? Here I am really not sure, and perhaps the reason is relly that the anwer depends on timing and other factors (which might include public opinion, Macron, Boris himself and so on.)
So maybe we take it one step at a time.....and very carefully?
All that is in the Act following the successful VONC is a 14-day period, after which if there has been no successful VOC, there is an election.
There isn't really any precedent, so what happens during that 14-day period will be up to discussion between the party leaders and the views of HMQ (in practice the trio of officials who advise her in such circumstances).
I'd expect them to put securing some certainty and stability (at least temporarily) as the priority (one can imagine the state the markets would be in), hence there will be a lot of pressure on MPs to identify a potential new PM and tolerance for several "goes" at forming a government within the 14 days.
Yes, thank you Ian. I can see that happening.
I am going to be crossing the Atlantic by sea for a week during late August and another week in mid October, with barely any internet during that period, so it would be good if these could be quiet weeks on the political front, please.
So many almost irresistable jokes to be made about that, but I'l settle for wishing you Bon Voyage!
Mr. B2, customs union membership is perhaps the single most stupid option available. Better to stay in than lose all influence and remain subject to the EU on trade, under worse than current conditions (regarding reciprocity).
Thanks None. I was beginning to think I was the only one to be getting a little confused here.
Thank you too David for a truly excellent piece, even if (perhaps because) not everyone agrees or follows your logic. Thanks too for the many excellent responses. They illustrate why reading PB is as good as if not better than reading even the quality press on the subject.
In short, I get the picture up to and including the VONC. In fact this is what I expect to happen. And I expect it to pass, because ND is the only alternative at that point and there aren't enough nutters in the house to take us into that except by accident (although such an accident remains an ever-present possibility.)
So what next? Here I am really not sure, and perhaps the reason is relly that the anwer depends on timing and other factors (which might include public opinion, Macron, Boris himself and so on.)
So maybe we take it one step at a time.....and very carefully?
Which quality press is that?
FT's pretty good, and the Economist. The Observer is good in parts and the Guardian has improved out of all recogintion. The Times has its moments and even the Borisograph too.
I've been buying hard copy a bit more lately. \it has pickd up.
I've not read the Economist in 20 odd years since they wrote an article on an industry I knew about referencing every idiot in the industry and not anyone who knew anything actually about the topic being discussed.
As with everything trust is very easily destroyed when the basis of that trust (articles are valid and not completely wrong) is lost..
Mr. B2, customs union membership is perhaps the single most stupid option available. Better to stay in than lose all influence and remain subject to the EU on trade, under worse than current conditions (regarding reciprocity).
Nevertheless there was a point when it looked likely to carry.
Mr. B2, further evidence, were it needed, of the childish perspective of MPs. Better to have nerve and back remaining, or actually leaving and regaining an independent trade policy, than a limp-wristed, weak-kneed, bedwetting halfway house that satisfies no-one.
When MPs voted to enact the referendum result, they lied. Most had no intention of doing so, but didn't dare come out and say it at the time. Their tactic was delay, delay, delay, and to keep fighting the referendum campaign.
The LDs, being superior beings, didn't bother with any fig leaves.
At heart, many Remainers know that, as do most Leavers. That's why faith in MPs is at historic lows, and likely to remain so.
No, had leavers got behind the deal, it would have carried at the first attempt. What remainers feel now is very different from what they felt in the year or two after the referendum. The utter hash leavers have made of things since then has created a counter-reaction, which is clear from this year's polls and elections.
You are both right.
Lying is perhaps too strong a word but MPs were certainly less than honest with the public about the consequences of the referendum outcome and the alternative ways forward it implied. Otoh, it is certainly true that we would be out by now if Leavers had not bolloxed it up.
They can't blame that on Remainers, no matter how 'diehard'.
Time, and events, have made them 'diehard', that's the point.
For sure, the LibDems were always diehard - but then (as was OFTEN commented on at the time) during 2017 and 2018, they polled very badly (as did UKIP). The majority was willing to accept a compromise, if only politicians had delivered one.
That was the message of the 2017 GE. No majority, no extremes - get together and sort this out. Mrs May and the Tory extremists are to blame for this not happening.
That is correct. I attended a private Labour meeting with Keri Starmer shortly after his appointment and he made it clear that Brexit could not be reversed, his job was to make sure the final settlement was as soft as possible. But then May made her "citizens of nowhere" speech and set out red lines which Labour could not possibly accept. Labour was excluded from any part in the negotiations and as the Tories fell out amongst themselves Labour's remain majority asserted itself and compromise became much more difficult.
HYUFD - you've given me a bloody good laugh on the previous thread.
Geography isn't exactly your strong point is it?
Anyhow, in anticipation of things kicking off in the Straits of Hormuz, the Emiratis have built a fecking huge oil terminal in Fujairah, with the oil moving there by pipeline. Clever folk.
OT. The Iranian spokesmen is very good indeed. Very articulate. Who authorised the British government to seize an Iranian ship travelling to Syria? Trump being the most unpopular politician in the UK by a large margin (yesterday's moon poll) isn't helping the EU or the British government with public opinion in this rapidly escalating crisis.
Thanks None. I was beginning to think I was the only one to be getting a little confused here.
Thank you too David for a truly excellent piece, even if (perhaps because) not everyone agrees or follows your logic. Thanks too for the many excellent responses. They illustrate why reading PB is as good as if not better than reading even the quality press on the subject.
In short, I get the picture up to and including the VONC. In fact this is what I expect to happen. And I expect it to pass, because ND is the only alternative at that point and there aren't enough nutters in the house to take us into that except by accident (although such an accident remains an ever-present possibility.)
So what next? Here I am really not sure, and perhaps the reason is relly that the anwer depends on timing and other factors (which might include public opinion, Macron, Boris himself and so on.)
So maybe we take it one step at a time.....and very carefully?
Which quality press is that?
FT's pretty good, and the Economist. The Observer is good in parts and the Guardian has improved out of all recogintion. The Times has its moments and even the Borisograph too.
I've been buying hard copy a bit more lately. \it has pickd up.
I've not read the Economist in 20 odd years since they wrote an article on an industry I knew about referencing every idiot in the industry and not anyone who knew anything actually about the topic being discussed.
As with everything trust is very easily destroyed when the basis of that trust (articles are valid and not completely wrong) is lost..
Snap. I used to subscribe for many years, but I eventually worked out that they fly by the seat of their pants. Glossy presentation cannot sell the turd of poor journalism.
Unlike you, I still do read it occasionally, but the mystique is gone. Trust is indeed very easily destroyed. Where are the signatories of “The Vow” now?
Mr. B2, customs union membership is perhaps the single most stupid option available. Better to stay in than lose all influence and remain subject to the EU on trade, under worse than current conditions (regarding reciprocity).
Not if your main objection to the EU was the political aspects and the drive towards a superstate. That is the problem with so many of the arguments about the supposed objections to the WA (from all sides) - the economic effect was portrayed as being the be all and the end all. Hence remainers “the best deal (economically) is the current deal and hard Brexiteers focus on the restriction implied by the customs union.
Shit I just looked up to see planes taking off from an aircraft carrier on the tv and thought that’s escalated quickly to then discover they were reviewing top gun
The Brexit negotiations were never going to be effective .Jezza and his boys would never accept a successful negotiations because they feared the Tories would receive credit for it, even if Jezza wasn't too bothered by the outcome.
I always suggested a UK negotiating team free of political bias. The EU team, although composed of failed nonentities had the advantage of being united in their aims - get the best deal for the EU.
Bringing in MPs with their varied loyalties doomed the project from the beginning.
Thanks None. I was beginning to think I was the only one to be getting a little confused here.
Thank you too David for a truly excellent piece, even if (perhaps because) not everyone agrees or follows your logic. Thanks too for the many excellent responses. They illustrate why reading PB is as good as if not better than reading even the quality press on the subject.
In short, I get the picture up to and including the VONC. In fact this is what I expect to happen. And I expect it to pass, because ND is the only alternative at that point and there aren't enough nutters in the house to take us into that except by accident (although such an accident remains an ever-present possibility.)
So what next? Here I am really not sure, and perhaps the reason is relly that the anwer depends on timing and other factors (which might include public opinion, Macron, Boris himself and so on.)
So maybe we take it one step at a time.....and very carefully?
Which quality press is that?
FT's pretty good, and the Economist. The Observer is good in parts and the Guardian has improved out of all recogintion. The Times has its moments and even the Borisograph too.
I've been buying hard copy a bit more lately. \it has pickd up.
I've not read the Economist in 20 odd years since they wrote an article on an industry I knew about referencing every idiot in the industry and not anyone who knew anything actually about the topic being discussed.
As with everything trust is very easily destroyed when the basis of that trust (articles are valid and not completely wrong) is lost..
Snap. I used to subscribe for many years, but I eventually worked out that they fly by the seat of their pants. Glossy presentation cannot sell the turd of poor journalism.
Unlike you, I still do read it occasionally, but the mystique is gone. Trust is indeed very easily destroyed. Where are the signatories of “The Vow” now?
Yes, I know what you mean. I used to enjoy listening to The Moral Maze until they did a programme on gambling which made it obvious their 'experts' didn't have a clue about the subject.
You have to read selectively, but there is some good stuff in the publications I mentioned, if you know where to look.
Mr. Alex, where's the advantage of subordinating our trade policy to a bloc of which would no longer be a member, who would not take account of our interests, and where we would lose reciprocity (so other nations would gain access to our markets and we would not, not being an EU member state, gain equivalent reciprocal access to theirs)?
As I said at the time, both before and after the referendum result, customs union membership would be my only red line. It's demented to leave the EU in the name of governing ourselves and consequently having less sovereignty over our own trade.
The Brexit negotiations were never going to be effective .Jezza and his boys would never accept a successful negotiations because they feared the Tories would receive credit for it, even if Jezza wasn't too bothered by the outcome.
I always suggested a UK negotiating team free of political bias. The EU team, although composed of failed nonentities had the advantage of being united in their aims - get the best deal for the EU.
Bringing in MPs with their varied loyalties doomed the project from the beginning.
OT. The Iranian spokesmen is very good indeed. Very articulate. Who authorised the British government to seize an Iranian ship travelling to Syria? Trump being the most unpopular politician in the UK by a large margin (yesterday's moon poll) isn't helping the EU or the British government with public opinion in this rapidly escalating crisis.
If he’s admitted that it was travelling to Syria then he’s somewhat undermined his position.
Mr. Observer, that disregards that MPs voted to endorse the referendum result, and refused multiple times to back May's deal. (And, of course, the electorate voted to leave).
Non-Conservative MPs had votes too, and the vast majority of them opposed the deal.
Whatever has happened up to now, the English nationalist hard right that controls the Tories own No Deal Brexit and its consequences 100%. They will be responsible for its consequences.
You know that, I know that, and they know that, but they’ll still try to argue that a big boy done it and ran away.
“A big boy did it an ran away” is the SNP manifesto Stuart.
I do understand your despair- trying to convince Scotland to vote to ditch the pound for the Euro will be an impossible task - especially with the backdrop of Salmond on trial for nefarious acts.
Did you read the poll that HYUFD posted at the start of the thread ? Johnson is electoral cyanide in Scotland.
The backdrop of a no deal Brexit under a Johnson government make another Indyref considerably more likely. Salmond is irrelevant to that.
Harry is obsessed with hating Salmond and Scotland, he is your usual Toom Tabard trying to show how he is really English. He is your diehard unionist , lost in the past.
The Brexit negotiations were never going to be effective .Jezza and his boys would never accept a successful negotiations because they feared the Tories would receive credit for it, even if Jezza wasn't too bothered by the outcome.
I always suggested a UK negotiating team free of political bias. The EU team, although composed of failed nonentities had the advantage of being united in their aims - get the best deal for the EU.
Mr. B2, if that's what someone believes, the reasonable stance is to advocate remaining.
Which is probably why the Lib Dems are doing rather better recently (aided by the short-lived Change UK perhaps-a-party that shook up the polling equilibrium that had been established between the two major parties).
Shit I just looked up to see planes taking off from an aircraft carrier on the tv and thought that’s escalated quickly to then discover they were reviewing top gun
I don't need to see a single frame to know it will be unbearably terrible. In the first one Viper says he flew F-4s off the Oriskany which never operated F-4s. For fuck's sake.
Thanks None. I was beginning to think I was the only one to be getting a little confused here.
Thank you too David for a truly excellent piece, even if (perhaps because) not everyone agrees or follows your logic. Thanks too for the many excellent responses. They illustrate why reading PB is as good as if not better than reading even the quality press on the subject.
In short, I get the picture up to and including the VONC. In fact this is what I expect to happen. And I expect it to pass, because ND is the only alternative at that point and there aren't enough nutters in the house to take us into that except by accident (although such an accident remains an ever-present possibility.)
So what next? Here I am really not sure, and perhaps the reason is relly that the anwer depends on timing and other factors (which might include public opinion, Macron, Boris himself and so on.)
So maybe we take it one step at a time.....and very carefully?
All that is in the Act following the successful VONC is a 14-day period, after which if there has been no successful VOC, there is an election.
There isn't really any precedent, so what happens during that 14-day period will be up to discussion between the party leaders and the views of HMQ (in practice the trio of officials who advise her in such circumstances).
I'd expect them to put securing some certainty and stability (at least temporarily) as the priority (one can imagine the state the markets would be in), hence there will be a lot of pressure on MPs to identify a potential new PM and tolerance for several "goes" at forming a government within the 14 days.
Yes, thank you Ian. I can see that happening.
I am going to be crossing the Atlantic by sea for a week during late August and another week in mid October, with barely any internet during that period, so it would be good if these could be quiet weeks on the political front, please.
My wife and I are going on a cruise to Canada and the US from Southampton in mid september spending five sea days each way crossing the Atlantic. We will be able to access the internet but it is very slow and expensive
If there is a successful VONC under the terms of the FTPA then Corbyn DOES NOT become PM. We wait for a fortnight and if the VONC is not rescinded there is a general election at which Boris would go into as PM.
Corbyn only becomes PM if LAB is in a position after the election to form a government
Did you even read the piece ? Here’s what David actually said: although the natural consequence of MPs voting to bring down Boris (especially in October), is that they must be prepared to install someone else, and in reality that means Jeremy Corbyn...
IOW he thinks a VONC followed by two weeks of failure to install a temporary PM just isn’t going to happen.
A general election prior to Brexit is a third possibility, I’ll grant, but I agree with David that it is exceedingly unlikely to be through this route.
But *in reality* that does not mean Corbyn. Corbyn doesn't command a majority in the house and neither the Queen nor any of her corgis are going to call him to be PM. At least not before a general election.
We live in volatile and unpredictable times yet people are searching for definites following a VoNC.
I would guess if a VONC passes and:
there is time to stop no deal afterwards - election 90% corbyn 2% others 8% there would need to be a temp govt to stop no deal - election 25% corbyn 20%, others 55%
The timing is key and might be why people are coming up with conflicting answers.
Others aren't possible without the consent of either the Labour or Tory parties, unless hundreds of MPs defect from those parties.
So are you suggesting there's a 55% chance Corbyn would back someone else over himself? Or a 55% chance that facing an election hundreds of MPs would abandon their parties?
I'd think both are more like 0.5% chances.
I'd say if there would need to be a temporary government to stop no deal: Corbyn 95% [surely MPs did the maths before passing the VONC] Election and No Deal during the election: 4% [oops!] Others 1%
Brexiteers tend to see the world with certainty! Around 400 MPs are strongly against no deal, Corbyn has loyal support of about 40MPs. Whilst he is the most likely candidate to represent the 400 due to his official position he is clearly problematic in getting the necessary tory votes across. If we get to the stage where it is GONU or no deal there will be enormous pressure on him to temporarily support/not block another candidate. How he reacts will depend to events and timings as much as his character, so is therefore far less certain than you are suggesting.
Thanks None. I was beginning to think I was the only one to be getting a little confused here.
Thank you too David for a truly excellent piece, even if (perhaps because) not everyone agrees or follows your logic. Thanks too for the many excellent responses. They illustrate why reading PB is as good as if not better than reading even the quality press on the subject.
In short, I get the picture up to and including the VONC. In fact this is what I expect to happen. And I expect it to pass, because ND is the only alternative at that point and there aren't enough nutters in the house to take us into that except by accident (although such an accident remains an ever-present possibility.)
So what next? Here I am really not sure, and perhaps the reason is relly that the anwer depends on timing and other factors (which might include public opinion, Macron, Boris himself and so on.)
So maybe we take it one step at a time.....and very carefully?
All that is in the Act following the successful VONC is a 14-day period, after which if there has been no successful VOC, there is an election.
There isn't really any precedent, so what happens during that 14-day period will be up to discussion between the party leaders and the views of HMQ (in practice the trio of officials who advise her in such circumstances).
I'd expect them to put securing some certainty and stability (at least temporarily) as the priority (one can imagine the state the markets would be in), hence there will be a lot of pressure on MPs to identify a potential new PM and tolerance for several "goes" at forming a government within the 14 days.
Yes, thank you Ian. I can see that happening.
I am going to be crossing the Atlantic by sea for a week during late August and another week in mid October, with barely any internet during that period, so it would be good if these could be quiet weeks on the political front, please.
You going in a submarine Ian. Surely cruise ships have wifi.
We are where we are because: 1) the electorate voted to leave 2) the Commons voted to endorse that result 3) May negotiated poorly and had appalling rhetoric 4) the Commons voted repeatedly against her deal
You can't simply wish away the fact that the majority of Conservative MPs backed leaving with a deal and a majority of all other MPs opposed it. If we're leaving and a deal is ruled out, that means leaving with no deal.
If MPs had a majority for an alternative (say, a referendum or straight revocation) that would be something. But opposing everything when the legal default is leaving without a deal is to take actions that lead to no deal.
Labour MPs had a say on deal or no deal. And they backed no deal.
Good luck with that! Boris Johnson tells us No Deal will be cheap, easy and painless. It will happen on his watch after he has been overwhelmingly elected by Tory members. He and they will own all that happens.
He will but Mr Dancer is still correct in laying out how many people who claim to be appalled by no deal have taken action to initiate it and keep it on the table. Their crocodile tears are deeply annoying.
Mr. Alex, where's the advantage of subordinating our trade policy to a bloc of which would no longer be a member, who would not take account of our interests, and where we would lose reciprocity (so other nations would gain access to our markets and we would not, not being an EU member state, gain equivalent reciprocal access to theirs)?
As I said at the time, both before and after the referendum result, customs union membership would be my only red line. It's demented to leave the EU in the name of governing ourselves and consequently having less sovereignty over our own trade.
I don’t think the “customs union” under the backstop would have endured. That is why it was the perfect solution. It was negative for U.K. trade with the rest of the World but hugely beneficial for trade with the EU. So the EU would have been as keen as us to find an alternative solution over time (also why Labour’s “permanent customs union” wouldn’t have been a flyer).
OT. The Iranian spokesmen is very good indeed. Very articulate. Who authorised the British government to seize an Iranian ship travelling to Syria? Trump being the most unpopular politician in the UK by a large margin (yesterday's moon poll) isn't helping the EU or the British government with public opinion in this rapidly escalating crisis.
If he’s admitted that it was travelling to Syria then he’s somewhat undermined his position.
He says that Iran never signed up to an embargo of Syria so there was no reason why their ships should not have been going there. He claimed Britain seized it on the orders of 'Trump'. (This man knows his PR)
Netball semi-finals today as Theresa May continues her quest to become the first prime minister with World Cups. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/netball/49046022 (sorry, Scotland; your cause is noble)
Excellent article David and I do think it is likely we will coast to a no deal and it does look like the EU are planning to mitigate any issues as per reports from the EU last night.
Reading last nights thread I have to express real concern that HYUFD has lost all his previous sense and has become a blinkered Boris acolyte which is unfortunate as he did provide a sensible conservative viewpoint until the last few weeks
And his comments on the Straits of Hormuz were so ignorant of the geography and maritime shipping movements that I just buried my head in my hands in utter despair
If and when you read this HYUFD, can we have the old HYUFD back
OT. The Iranian spokesmen is very good indeed. Very articulate. Who authorised the British government to seize an Iranian ship travelling to Syria? Trump being the most unpopular politician in the UK by a large margin (yesterday's moon poll) isn't helping the EU or the British government with public opinion in this rapidly escalating crisis.
If he’s admitted that it was travelling to Syria then he’s somewhat undermined his position.
He says that Iran never signed up to an embargo of Syria so there was no reason why their ships should not have been going there. He claimed Britain seized it on the orders of 'Trump'. (This man knows his PR)
Aren’t these UN sanctions? Iran doesn’t get a choice whether to sign up to them or not.
Excellent article David and I do think it is likely we will coast to a no deal and it does look like the EU are planning to mitigate any issues as per reports from the EU last night.
Reading last nights thread I have to express real concern that HYUFD has lost all his previous sense and has become a blinkered Boris acolyte which is unfortunate as he did provide a sensible conservative viewpoint until the last few weeks
And his comments on the Straits of Hormuz were so ignorant of the geography and maritime shipping movements that I just buried my head in my hands in utter despair
If and when you read this HYUFD, can we have the old HYUFD back
There’s no point in MPs ganging together to prevent no deal unless they can actuallly produce majority support for an alternative.
Quite so. It's been one of the most tiresome parts of politics for all of 2019, particular from those mps who do want to leave and dislike no deal whi still dont vote for a deal. They just say no over and over without saying yes to anything.
Thanks None. I was beginning to think I was the only one to be getting a little confused here.
Thank you too David for a truly excellent piece, even if (perhaps because) not everyone agrees or follows your logic. Thanks too for the many excellent responses. They illustrate why reading PB is as good as if not better than reading even the quality press on the subject.
In short, I get the picture up to and including the VONC. In fact this is what I expect to happen. And I expect it to pass, because ND is the only alternative at that point and there aren't enough nutters in the house to take us into that except by accident (although such an accident remains an ever-present possibility.)
So what next? Here I am really not sure, and perhaps the reason is relly that the anwer depends on timing and other factors (which might include public opinion, Macron, Boris himself and so on.)
So maybe we take it one step at a time.....and very carefully?
All that is in the Act following the successful VONC is a 14-day period, after which if there has been no successful VOC, there is an election.
There isn't really any precedent, so what happens during that 14-day period will be up to discussion between the party leaders and the views of HMQ (in practice the trio of officials who advise her in such circumstances).
I'd expect them to put securing some certainty and stability (at least temporarily) as the priority (one can imagine the state the markets would be in), hence there will be a lot of pressure on MPs to identify a potential new PM and tolerance for several "goes" at forming a government within the 14 days.
Yes, thank you Ian. I can see that happening.
I am going to be crossing the Atlantic by sea for a week during late August and another week in mid October, with barely any internet during that period, so it would be good if these could be quiet weeks on the political front, please.
You going in a submarine Ian. Surely cruise ships have wifi.
There is wifi via satellite but it is ridiculously expensive and judging from reviews also extremely slow. On the outward I will probably try and enjoy the break from being perpetually online, assuming late summer will be quiet. The October week could be the crunch one so I may have to stump up for at least fleeting access.
Does anyone foresee any circumstances in which the 7 Sinn Fein MPs take their seats? Some of these outcomes have serious consequences for Ireland.
There are 7 constituencies that are unrepresented in parliament because of our anachronistic requirement to swear an oath of allegiance to the queen. Those constituencies are entitled to elect who they want and we should not be effectively disenfranchised. because they are republicans. There is something really wrong with that in this day and age and those 7 votes could have been crucial in a number of votes over the last year or so.
On the other hand the prospect of No Deal resulting in a united Ireland might trump other considerations
Does anyone foresee any circumstances in which the 7 Sinn Fein MPs take their seats? Some of these outcomes have serious consequences for Ireland.
There are 7 constituencies that are unrepresented in parliament because of our anachronistic requirement to swear an oath of allegiance to the queen. Those constituencies are entitled to elect who they want and we should not be effectively disenfranchised. because they are republicans. There is something really wrong with that in this day and age and those 7 votes could have been crucial in a number of votes over the last year or so.
Excellent article David and I do think it is likely we will coast to a no deal and it does look like the EU are planning to mitigate any issues as per reports from the EU last night.
Reading last nights thread I have to express real concern that HYUFD has lost all his previous sense and has become a blinkered Boris acolyte which is unfortunate as he did provide a sensible conservative viewpoint until the last few weeks
And his comments on the Straits of Hormuz were so ignorant of the geography and maritime shipping movements that I just buried my head in my hands in utter despair
If and when you read this HYUFD, can we have the old HYUFD back
Your memory is better than mine.
His comments on the SOH and Iran were so ridiculous it was plain embarrassing
He did vote remain and for a long time we took a similar view that TM deal was reasonable and that the WDA should have been passed. That remains my view but he has sadly morphed into an extreme brexiteer blinded by IDS and Boris
Mr. Alex, we should never sign up to something in the short term that would be unacceptable for the long term, given that there's no alternative required (legally) and the EU wouldn't accept a change which doesn't give them either an outright advantage or an improvement on the current situation.
Things which seem like they could be over quickly can become quite prolonged.
Like @Peter_the_Punter I think this is a great article precisely because it is controversial. Like @Peter_the_Punter I think we should take one step at a time. However, I expect I will ignore my own advice regularly.
Excellent article David and I do think it is likely we will coast to a no deal and it does look like the EU are planning to mitigate any issues as per reports from the EU last night.
Reading last nights thread I have to express real concern that HYUFD has lost all his previous sense and has become a blinkered Boris acolyte which is unfortunate as he did provide a sensible conservative viewpoint until the last few weeks
And his comments on the Straits of Hormuz were so ignorant of the geography and maritime shipping movements that I just buried my head in my hands in utter despair
If and when you read this HYUFD, can we have the old HYUFD back
Your memory is better than mine.
His comments on the SOH and Iran were so ridiculous it was plain embarrassing
He did vote remain and for a long time we took a similar view that TM deal was reasonable and that the WDA should have been passed. That remains my view but he has sadly morphed into an extreme brexiteer blinded by IDS and Boris
Yes. The ERG started it, but now almost everyone is an extremist, one way or the other.
Shit I just looked up to see planes taking off from an aircraft carrier on the tv and thought that’s escalated quickly to then discover they were reviewing top gun
I don't need to see a single frame to know it will be unbearably terrible. In the first one Viper says he flew F-4s off the Oriskany which never operated F-4s. For fuck's sake.
LOL. You sound as though you’re channelling ydoethur.
I think it might be targeted at those of us who’ve never flown fast jets.... Looking at the trailer the cinematography looks pretty good; the plot will naturally be ludicrous.
If there is a successful VONC under the terms of the FTPA then Corbyn DOES NOT become PM. We wait for a fortnight and if the VONC is not rescinded there is a general election at which Boris would go into as PM.
Corbyn only becomes PM if LAB is in a position after the election to form a government
Thank you Mike for the clarification. I'm not quite sure what David was thinking when he wrote that but he was wrong. As you state, a successful VONC does NOT put Corbyn into No.10 so it's completely wrong to suggest that Cons MPs voting for it are voting for Corbyn as PM. This is a non sequitur. Hopefully anyone reading the piece will realise the error...
Did you even read the piece ? Here’s what David actually said: although the natural consequence of MPs voting to bring down Boris (especially in October), is that they must be prepared to install someone else, and in reality that means Jeremy Corbyn...
Which is completely and utterly wrong. Voting No Confidence does not mean the house has to have confidence in anyone else. Absolute Non Sequitur. They can go to a General Election which, after all, was the time-honoured response to a successful VONC.
Does anyone foresee any circumstances in which the 7 Sinn Fein MPs take their seats? Some of these outcomes have serious consequences for Ireland.
There are 7 constituencies that are unrepresented in parliament because of our anachronistic requirement to swear an oath of allegiance to the queen. Those constituencies are entitled to elect who they want and we should not be effectively disenfranchised. because they are republicans. There is something really wrong with that in this day and age and those 7 votes could have been crucial in a number of votes over the last year or so.
Those constituencies wilfully elect people who openly tell them that they wont take up those seats in parliament. Therefore they are not disenfranchised against their will and they have republican alternatives if a plurality in those areas want both a United Ireland and to be represented in the UK parliament.
So I see nothing wrong with it as the voters there have made their choice knowing the consequences.
As for the anachronistic oath thing you can easily turn it around and say how silly it is that people wont just do it and cross their fingers or do it while making clear their thoughts on the nature on monarchy and the UK. Some pretty much do already.
Bottom line is though that they are clear on what they will do, voters back them, and they do it, so I am entirely unoutraged.
Thanks None. I was beginning to think I was the only one to be getting a little confused here.
Thank you too David for a truly excellent piece, even if (perhaps because) not everyone agrees or follows your logic. Thanks too for the many excellent responses. They illustrate why reading PB is as good as if not better than reading even the quality press on the subject.
In short, I get the picture up to and including the VONC. In fact this is what I expect to happen. And I expect it to pass, because ND is the only alternative at that point and there aren't enough nutters in the house to take us into that except by accident (although such an accident remains an ever-present possibility.)
So what next? Here I am really not sure, and perhaps the reason is relly that the anwer depends on timing and other factors (which might include public opinion, Macron, Boris himself and so on.)
So maybe we take it one step at a time.....and very carefully?
All that is in the Act following the successful VONC is a 14-day period, after which if there has been no successful VOC, there is an election.
There isn't really any precedent, so what happens during that 14-day period will be up to discussion between the party leaders and the views of HMQ (in practice the trio of officials who advise her in such circumstances).
I'd expect them to put securing some certainty and stability (at least temporarily) as the priority (one can imagine the state the markets would be in), hence there will be a lot of pressure on MPs to identify a potential new PM and tolerance for several "goes" at forming a government within the 14 days.
Yes, thank you Ian. I can see that happening.
I am going to be crossing the Atlantic by sea for a week during late August and another week in mid October, with barely any internet during that period, so it would be good if these could be quiet weeks on the political front, please.
You going in a submarine Ian. Surely cruise ships have wifi.
There is wifi via satellite but it is ridiculously expensive and judging from reviews also extremely slow. On the outward I will probably try and enjoy the break from being perpetually online, assuming late summer will be quiet. The October week could be the crunch one so I may have to stump up for at least fleeting access.
I have been on cruise ships crossing the Atlantic and the Pacific with even an ice strengthened ship in Antartica and getting on line is slow and because of that it can be quite expensive
If there is a successful VONC under the terms of the FTPA then Corbyn DOES NOT become PM. We wait for a fortnight and if the VONC is not rescinded there is a general election at which Boris would go into as PM.
Corbyn only becomes PM if LAB is in a position after the election to form a government
Thank you Mike for the clarification. I'm not quite sure what David was thinking when he wrote that but he was wrong. As you state, a successful VONC does NOT put Corbyn into No.10 so it's completely wrong to suggest that Cons MPs voting for it are voting for Corbyn as PM. This is a non sequitur. Hopefully anyone reading the piece will realise the error...
Did you even read the piece ? Here’s what David actually said: although the natural consequence of MPs voting to bring down Boris (especially in October), is that they must be prepared to install someone else, and in reality that means Jeremy Corbyn...
Which is completely and utterly wrong. Voting No Confidence does not mean the house has to have confidence in anyone else. Absolute Non Sequitur. They can go to a General Election which, after all, was the time-honoured response to a successful VONC.
Doing that in Octobet would mean no deal happens, ergo to be sure to prevent no deal they do need to appoint someone else.
If they are to bring Boris down over his willingness to no deal, it makes no sense to not take other action necessary to guarantee prevention of no deal, with a new PM.
I remember back in March/April when sages on here sonorously pronounced that we were coasting to a No Deal, that it was inevitable, that little or nothing could stop it now.
At the time I said, in a polite way, that this was wrong and that there was "no chance" of a No Deal. I was shouted down.
But the facts remain the same. The House of Commons will not allow No Deal. You can chunter as much as you like. You can gnash your teeth. You can wave all manner of legal parchments at me. But it won't happen.
And secure in that certainty, I bid you all a happy Saturday.
If there is a successful VONC under the terms of the FTPA then Corbyn DOES NOT become PM. We wait for a fortnight and if the VONC is not rescinded there is a general election at which Boris would go into as PM.
Corbyn only becomes PM if LAB is in a position after the election to form a government
Thank you Mike for the clarification. I'm not quite sure what David was thinking when he wrote that but he was wrong. As you state, a successful VONC does NOT put Corbyn into No.10 so it's completely wrong to suggest that Cons MPs voting for it are voting for Corbyn as PM. This is a non sequitur. Hopefully anyone reading the piece will realise the error...
Did you even read the piece ? Here’s what David actually said: although the natural consequence of MPs voting to bring down Boris (especially in October), is that they must be prepared to install someone else, and in reality that means Jeremy Corbyn...
Which is completely and utterly wrong. Voting No Confidence does not mean the house has to have confidence in anyone else. Absolute Non Sequitur. They can go to a General Election which, after all, was the time-honoured response to a successful VONC.
David’s view, whether you accept it or not, was that there is no point to a VONC as a means of preventing no deal without a determination to install a temporary PM, and that is quite clear from what he wrote.
Well of course PB is at it best when there are contrasting views but I believe it is a very good article
It is, but it does contain some questionable assumptions. Prorogation, far from being pointless, would be done to prevent a VONC (David is however right in concluding this is unlikely). There probably ARE other ways Parliament could prevent a no deal, or at least make a PM's life extremely difficult short of a VONC, such that he will bend to parliament's will. Would a PM really refuse to extend, and take personal responsibility for no deal, if parliament had instructed him to extend? If the alternative is chaos and no deal, the alternatives of a short term Corbyn government, or cross-party willingness to endure a short spell of GONU, could easily be greater than David assumes, if it is to be followed by a GE.
The bottom line is that it would take a very bold, brave and determined PM to flout the will of Parliament on such a major issue, with so much at stake. And has there been any sign of bravery or boldness from the great Bozo to date? Mostly he's been hiding behind the sofa.
A successful VONC followed by a Government of National Unity to prevent a No Deal Brexit by whatever means necessary would appear to be the least worst option.
Hilary Benn, Ken Clarke or Caroline Lucas - your time for stardom is near.
“National Unity” would be an ironic title as it would be despised by possibly the biggest majority of the county ever seen.
The elites taking over mantra would be very powerful.
LDs, Lab, The SNP and the Wets coming together to order and then lose another referendum.
It is No Deal that that a GNU would be coming together to stop so unless you are claiming that a No Deal is what 17.4 million people voted for in 2016 your point doesn't really stack up.
I think DH article misses one key point . Let’s say the vote was lost . What message would that have sent out .
Remember we have been told countless times by Leave Tories that the more moderate Tories never match their words with actions . There were also new rebels who have surfaced re stopping no deal.
I accept its not easy to stop no deal if a PM is intent on going there however Thursday was crucial in laying a marker and is a confidence booster to those against no deal.
"There is growing confidence among key member states that a no-deal Brexit can be avoided after the Commons voted this week to prevent the next prime minister, likely to be Johnson, from proroguing parliament."
Excellent article David and I do think it is likely we will coast to a no deal and it does look like the EU are planning to mitigate any issues as per reports from the EU last night.
Reading last nights thread I have to express real concern that HYUFD has lost all his previous sense and has become a blinkered Boris acolyte which is unfortunate as he did provide a sensible conservative viewpoint until the last few weeks
And his comments on the Straits of Hormuz were so ignorant of the geography and maritime shipping movements that I just buried my head in my hands in utter despair
If and when you read this HYUFD, can we have the old HYUFD back
Your memory is better than mine.
His comments on the SOH and Iran were so ridiculous it was plain embarrassing
He did vote remain and for a long time we took a similar view that TM deal was reasonable and that the WDA should have been passed. That remains my view but he has sadly morphed into an extreme brexiteer blinded by IDS and Boris
I think that HYUFD is essentially a party line man. He has a vast knowledge of politics and polling but is inclined to apply his knowledge in a highly mechanistic fashion. He is no more wrong than most, however: he has consistently pointed out the inevitability of a Boris leadership, even though 'lay Boris' has long been the collective wisdom of this distiguished parish.
When MPs voted to enact the referendum result, they lied. Most had no intention of doing so, but didn't dare come out and say it at the time. Their tactic was delay, delay, delay, and to keep fighting the referendum campaign.
The LDs, being superior beings, didn't bother with any fig leaves.
At heart, many Remainers know that, as do most Leavers. That's why faith in MPs is at historic lows, and likely to remain so.
No, had leavers got behind the deal, it would have carried at the first attempt. What remainers feel now is very different from what they felt in the year or two after the referendum. The utter hash leavers have made of things since then has created a counter-reaction, which is clear from this year's polls and elections.
Shit I just looked up to see planes taking off from an aircraft carrier on the tv and thought that’s escalated quickly to then discover they were reviewing top gun
I don't need to see a single frame to know it will be unbearably terrible. In the first one Viper says he flew F-4s off the Oriskany which never operated F-4s. For fuck's sake.
LOL. You sound as though you’re channelling ydoethur.
I think it might be targeted at those of us who’ve never flown fast jets.... Looking at the trailer the cinematography looks pretty good; the plot will naturally be ludicrous.
Frankly I'd be disappointed in a Cruise movie that had a sensible plot. One of the more gritty films if his I've seen, Collateral, is still ludicrous.
It will be interesting to see if the next MI films can somehow get more ludicrous without becoming too ludicrous somehow, as that Fast and Furious spin off looks from the 'trying too hard' trailers.
A successful VONC followed by a Government of National Unity to prevent a No Deal Brexit by whatever means necessary would appear to be the least worst option.
Hilary Benn, Ken Clarke or Caroline Lucas - your time for stardom is near.
“National Unity” would be an ironic title as it would be despised by possibly the biggest majority of the county ever seen.
The elites taking over mantra would be very powerful.
LDs, Lab, The SNP and the Wets coming together to order and then lose another referendum.
It is No Deal that that a GNU would be coming together to stop so unless you are claiming that a No Deal is what 17.4 million people voted for in 2016 your point doesn't really stack up.
+1 - I voted to sanely leave the EU - so that the EU could continue it's merger process without us being a blocker...
I definitely didn't vote for a "lets annoy the people we still need to negotiate with by doing something utterly insane" No Deal...
Excellent article David and I do think it is likely we will coast to a no deal and it does look like the EU are planning to mitigate any issues as per reports from the EU last night.
Reading last nights thread I have to express real concern that HYUFD has lost all his previous sense and has become a blinkered Boris acolyte which is unfortunate as he did provide a sensible conservative viewpoint until the last few weeks
And his comments on the Straits of Hormuz were so ignorant of the geography and maritime shipping movements that I just buried my head in my hands in utter despair
If and when you read this HYUFD, can we have the old HYUFD back
Your memory is better than mine.
His comments on the SOH and Iran were so ridiculous it was plain embarrassing
He did vote remain and for a long time we took a similar view that TM deal was reasonable and that the WDA should have been passed. That remains my view but he has sadly morphed into an extreme brexiteer blinded by IDS and Boris
I think that HYUFD is essentially a party line man. He has a vast knowledge of politics and polling but is inclined to apply his knowledge in a highly mechanistic fashion. He is no more wrong than most, however: he has consistently pointed out the inevitability of a Boris leadership, even though 'lay Boris' has long been the collective wisdom of this distiguished parish.
We’ll leave without a deal on 31st October. From here, it’s important that the Brexit loons own every bit of what happens. Hard right English nationalism is a disease that can only be defeated by exposure to reality. It needs to be humiliated before it is eviscerated. Its consequences have to be fully worked through. That will mean a lot of pain for a lot of people, but that is the choice the former Conservative and Unionist Party has made.
I think the hardliners knew that their version of Brexit would not win a referendum so the plan was to dupe the electorate into thinking they would get a good deal and all the other nonsense then hijack the result for their own ends once the vote was in the bag. As soon as the referendum was won then the refrain began that any form of deal was a betraying the Brexit people voted for.
The article states that "May played along but only because she chose to. She could, quite consistently with Cooper I, have rejected the EU’s counter-offer of an extension and let the clock run out on April 12."
The impression I got was that the advice of the attorney general, Geoffrey Cox, was certainly a stronger factor than that implies, and that she had to follow the expressed wishes of the Commons.
As Geoffrey Cox is considered likely to be a key part of the new cabinet it may be not be as clear cut as the PM acting as he might like.
The brains are on the anti no deal side, as is the referee in the speaker. We do not know what their plan is (nor did we in Dec 18 and were told no deal happens if nothing else does) but they may well be able to stop no deal without toppling the govt.
Mr. Observer, that disregards that MPs voted to endorse the referendum result, and refused multiple times to back May's deal. (And, of course, the electorate voted to leave).
Non-Conservative MPs had votes too, and the vast majority of them opposed the deal.
Whatever has happened up to now, the English nationalist hard right that controls the Tories own No Deal Brexit and its consequences 100%. They will be responsible for its consequences.
You know that, I know that, and they know that, but they’ll still try to argue that a big boy done it and ran away.
“A big boy did it an ran away” is the SNP manifesto Stuart.
I do understand your despair- trying to convince Scotland to vote to ditch the pound for the Euro will be an impossible task - especially with the backdrop of Salmond on trial for nefarious acts.
Did you read the poll that HYUFD posted at the start of the thread ? Johnson is electoral cyanide in Scotland.
The backdrop of a no deal Brexit under a Johnson government make another Indyref considerably more likely. Salmond is irrelevant to that.
Harry is obsessed with hating Salmond and Scotland, he is your usual Toom Tabard trying to show how he is really English. He is your diehard unionist , lost in the past.
Says the guy labelling him with an epithet seven centuries old...
Shit I just looked up to see planes taking off from an aircraft carrier on the tv and thought that’s escalated quickly to then discover they were reviewing top gun
I don't need to see a single frame to know it will be unbearably terrible. In the first one Viper says he flew F-4s off the Oriskany which never operated F-4s. For fuck's sake.
A bit of knowledge can ruin a film. Like in that Bond film (Skyfall?) where they are travelling on the District line in a Jubilee line train. The whole thing fell apart for me then. I think in the same film they drive to Scotland down the New Cross Road!
Why do people think that Corbyn would go for an extension if he were able to do so? I don’t believe Corbyn has any interest in negotiating a WA with the EU. Let No Deal happen, blame the Tories and he has a free hand to do whatever he wants.
Anyway I am assuming that No Deal is pretty much inevitable. The Tories will rightly take the blame. I hope they are eviscerated at the next election whenever it comes. And I hope the Lib Dems choose a leader who is able to take advantage of the fact that both Tories and Labour are utterly shite parties led by two of the worst leaders ever inflicted on us.
We’ll leave without a deal on 31st October. From here, it’s important that the Brexit loons own every bit of what happens. Hard right English nationalism is a disease that can only be defeated by exposure to reality. It needs to be humiliated before it is eviscerated. Its consequences have to be fully worked through. That will mean a lot of pain for a lot of people, but that is the choice the former Conservative and Unionist Party has made.
I think the hardliners knew that their version of Brexit would not win a referendum so the plan was to dupe the electorate into thinking they would get a good deal and all the other nonsense then hijack the result for their own ends once the vote was in the bag. As soon as the referendum was won then the refrain began that any form of deal was a betraying the Brexit people voted for.
Indeed. Which is why their claim to have a mandate and their refusal to seek an express one for what they are planning to do is so utterly dishonest and damaging to our democracy.
"There is growing confidence among key member states that a no-deal Brexit can be avoided after the Commons voted this week to prevent the next prime minister, likely to be Johnson, from proroguing parliament."
Well there is that, but the more significant point is that they are putting out feelers which might be attractive to a non ideological blagger like Johnson. The extra period of EU membership would be used for renegotiation but could be billed to Conservative Brexiters as an opportunity to prepare further for leaving without a deal.
“It will be described as a technical delay to save Boris from political embarrassment but then we will have time to find an agreement,” said one senior EU diplomat.
It has at least as good a chance as anything in David’s article.
Why do people think that Corbyn would go for an extension if he were able to do so?
The biggest set of votes up for grabs at the next election is floating remain voters. It is probably about 20% of the electorate looking at the drop in Labour from GE17 to current polling plus Tory remainers looking for a new home. Their vote is very fluid at the moment.
If Corbyn brings us no deal, Labour miss out on most of those votes. If they make it a condition of a GE then they may get most of those votes as they did in GE17.
Netball semi-finals today as Theresa May continues her quest to become the first prime minister with World Cups. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/netball/49046022 (sorry, Scotland; your cause is noble)
Does anyone foresee any circumstances in which the 7 Sinn Fein MPs take their seats? Some of these outcomes have serious consequences for Ireland.
There are 7 constituencies that are unrepresented in parliament because of our anachronistic requirement to swear an oath of allegiance to the queen. Those constituencies are entitled to elect who they want and we should not be effectively disenfranchised. because they are republicans. There is something really wrong with that in this day and age and those 7 votes could have been crucial in a number of votes over the last year or so.
Those constituencies wilfully elect people who openly tell them that they wont take up those seats in parliament. Therefore they are not disenfranchised against their will and they have republican alternatives if a plurality in those areas want both a United Ireland and to be represented in the UK parliament.
So I see nothing wrong with it as the voters there have made their choice knowing the consequences.
As for the anachronistic oath thing you can easily turn it around and say how silly it is that people wont just do it and cross their fingers or do it while making clear their thoughts on the nature on monarchy and the UK. Some pretty much do already.
Bottom line is though that they are clear on what they will do, voters back them, and they do it, so I am entirely unoutraged.
Doesn't really alter the fact that we should not be keeping anachronistic rules in place that prevent democratically elected MPs taking their seats unless they are prepared to forego their principles. It's 2019 for god's sake.
Shit I just looked up to see planes taking off from an aircraft carrier on the tv and thought that’s escalated quickly to then discover they were reviewing top gun
I don't need to see a single frame to know it will be unbearably terrible. In the first one Viper says he flew F-4s off the Oriskany which never operated F-4s. For fuck's sake.
A bit of knowledge can ruin a film. Like in that Bond film (Skyfall?) where they are travelling on the District line in a Jubilee line train. The whole thing fell apart for me then. I think in the same film they drive to Scotland down the New Cross Road!
One has to accept that fiction is fiction. One of the things I enjoyed about the old Morse series was the surreal geography of his Oxford. The number of dramas where everything is done well are infinitesimal; you have to enjoy the bits that are done well or give up on drama altogether.
Mr. Observer, that disregards that MPs voted to endorse the referendum result, and refused multiple times to back May's deal. (And, of course, the electorate voted to leave).
Non-Conservative MPs had votes too, and the vast majority of them opposed the deal.
Whatever has happened up to now, the English nationalist hard right that controls the Tories own No Deal Brexit and its consequences 100%. They will be responsible for its consequences.
You know that, I know that, and they know that, but they’ll still try to argue that a big boy done it and ran away.
“A big boy did it an ran away” is the SNP manifesto Stuart.
I do understand your despair- trying to convince Scotland to vote to ditch the pound for the Euro will be an impossible task - especially with the backdrop of Salmond on trial for nefarious acts.
Did you read the poll that HYUFD posted at the start of the thread ? Johnson is electoral cyanide in Scotland.
The backdrop of a no deal Brexit under a Johnson government make another Indyref considerably more likely. Salmond is irrelevant to that.
Harry is obsessed with hating Salmond and Scotland, he is your usual Toom Tabard trying to show how he is really English. He is your diehard unionist , lost in the past.
Says the guy labelling him with an epithet seven centuries old...
The truth hurts Nigel, it is appropriate description of his type, given he lives in the past. Plus there is no bigger insult.
HYUFD - you've given me a bloody good laugh on the previous thread.
Geography isn't exactly your strong point is it?
Anyhow, in anticipation of things kicking off in the Straits of Hormuz, the Emiratis have built a fecking huge oil terminal in Fujairah, with the oil moving there by pipeline. Clever folk.
Well fine, otherwise if the Iranians keep capturing oil tankers flying UK flags military strikes would be inevitable unless the left as usual wants to be walked all over which would not happy under PM Boris
Shit I just looked up to see planes taking off from an aircraft carrier on the tv and thought that’s escalated quickly to then discover they were reviewing top gun
I don't need to see a single frame to know it will be unbearably terrible. In the first one Viper says he flew F-4s off the Oriskany which never operated F-4s. For fuck's sake.
We’ll leave without a deal on 31st October. From here, it’s important that the Brexit loons own every bit of what happens. Hard right English nationalism is a disease that can only be defeated by exposure to reality. It needs to be humiliated before it is eviscerated. Its consequences have to be fully worked through. That will mean a lot of pain for a lot of people, but that is the choice the former Conservative and Unionist Party has made.
Whilst we also lob a few cruise missiles at Iran to keep trump happy according to our resident Tory expert
The SoH is too shallow for Astute ops and the T45s didn't get strike length VLS launchers to save money so TLAM strikes aren't an option unless we ask the US to do them for us.
I bow to your superior knowledge our resident Tory experts military knowledge is as good as his geography.
I am sure Saudi Arabia would happily host some RAF fighter jets to launch bombing missiles on Iran if need be
Shit I just looked up to see planes taking off from an aircraft carrier on the tv and thought that’s escalated quickly to then discover they were reviewing top gun
I don't need to see a single frame to know it will be unbearably terrible. In the first one Viper says he flew F-4s off the Oriskany which never operated F-4s. For fuck's sake.
A bit of knowledge can ruin a film. Like in that Bond film (Skyfall?) where they are travelling on the District line in a Jubilee line train. The whole thing fell apart for me then. I think in the same film they drive to Scotland down the New Cross Road!
One has to accept that fiction is fiction. One of the things I enjoyed about the old Morse series was the surreal geography of his Oxford. The number of dramas where everything is done well are infinitesimal; you have to enjoy the bits that are done well or give up on drama altogether.
I guess I can make exceptions for the Underground as there are basically only a few bits (the old Jubilee line platforms at Charing Cross, the Waterloo and City line) where they can film easily. But substituting a deep tube train for subsurface rolling stock is a big stretch. Mind you, Bond films are not exactly cinema verite.
Excellent article David and I do think it is likely we will coast to a no deal and it does look like the EU are planning to mitigate any issues as per reports from the EU last night.
Reading last nights thread I have to express real concern that HYUFD has lost all his previous sense and has become a blinkered Boris acolyte which is unfortunate as he did provide a sensible conservative viewpoint until the last few weeks
And his comments on the Straits of Hormuz were so ignorant of the geography and maritime shipping movements that I just buried my head in my hands in utter despair
If and when you read this HYUFD, can we have the old HYUFD back
Your memory is better than mine.
His comments on the SOH and Iran were so ridiculous it was plain embarrassing
He did vote remain and for a long time we took a similar view that TM deal was reasonable and that the WDA should have been passed. That remains my view but he has sadly morphed into an extreme brexiteer blinded by IDS and Boris
The aim is the Withdrawal Agreement minus backstop which as the Brady amendment showed has a majority in the Commons. Merkel seemed to be moving towards that yesterday and resolving the Irish border with a technical solution in the PD and future Declaration.
Then move towards a Canada style FTA with the EU otherwise No Deal until then
Comments
That the likelihood of the House backing a temporary Corbyn government is exceedingly slim, doesn’t invalidate it as a possible option.
The chance of somehow engineering a general election to return a new government before the end of October in order to ‘stop Boris’ looks even more unlikely. It is not a real choice for those determined to stop no deal.
I’d agree that a no deal Brexit is looking increasingly likely.
The ERG mustered around 80 votes, the Labour party,who voted to enact the result mustered over 200 votes, Clearly, it's all the ERG's fault. Nothing to do with the liars then?
For sure, the LibDems were always diehard - but then (as was OFTEN commented on at the time) during 2017 and 2018, they polled very badly (as did UKIP). The majority was willing to accept a compromise, if only politicians had delivered one.
That was the message of the 2017 GE. No majority, no extremes - get together and sort this out. Mrs May and the Tory extremists are to blame for this not happening.
It is less likely now though than it was - I think Boris has convinced himself that with his usual panache and charm he will be able to either win over the EU or the Commons - he doesn't care which.
As for a national unity government it doesn't matter what Jezbollah wants - he won't be in it. The Commons realises there is a majority of MPs once party divisions are dropped, they appoint one of their own grandees, they govern. And sat alongside each other on the opposition benches are Johnson and Corbyn. Both Tory and Labour Parties will have split apart, but No Deal will have been averted.
It's going to be fun*
'Liars' is not too harsh a word. They had no intention of enacting the result. They could have stood aside and been neutral, but they actively worked to bring powers back to MPs so they had control and could block everything. They knowingly lied.
By comparison, the LD's pledge on tuition fees wasn't a lie. They would have gone through with it had they had the power to do so. Just because you support the lie doesn't make it less of one. When you break faith so obviously with the electorate, there will always be a reckoning.
https://twitter.com/UKBrexitParty1/status/1152326942848368640?s=20
I've been buying hard copy a bit more lately. \it has pickd up.
As I've said for ages now either Boris goes for a vote on Wednesday / Thursday or an election isn't an option..
A few votes different, and a CU/CM2 option could have emerged from that process with a majority, setting subsequent events on a different path. Remember more parliamentary time was earmarked to take the outcome of the Letwin process forward. The question is how Tory and Labour front benches would have reacted to MPs having taken control.
As with everything trust is very easily destroyed when the basis of that trust (articles are valid and not completely wrong) is lost..
‘Scotland will go independent, Ireland become one, and England ... pfft’
($)
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/17783711.fidelma-cook-scotland-will-go-independent-ireland-become-one-england-pfft/
Unlike you, I still do read it occasionally, but the mystique is gone. Trust is indeed very easily destroyed. Where are the signatories of “The Vow” now?
I always suggested a UK negotiating team free of political bias. The EU team, although composed of failed nonentities had the advantage of being united in their aims - get the best deal for the EU.
Bringing in MPs with their varied loyalties doomed the project from the beginning.
You have to read selectively, but there is some good stuff in the publications I mentioned, if you know where to look.
As I said at the time, both before and after the referendum result, customs union membership would be my only red line. It's demented to leave the EU in the name of governing ourselves and consequently having less sovereignty over our own trade.
Which is probably why the Lib Dems are doing rather better recently (aided by the short-lived Change UK perhaps-a-party that shook up the polling equilibrium that had been established between the two major parties).
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/netball/49046022
(sorry, Scotland; your cause is noble)
Reading last nights thread I have to express real concern that HYUFD has lost all his previous sense and has become a blinkered Boris acolyte which is unfortunate as he did provide a sensible conservative viewpoint until the last few weeks
And his comments on the Straits of Hormuz were so ignorant of the geography and maritime shipping movements that I just buried my head in my hands in utter despair
If and when you read this HYUFD, can we have the old HYUFD back
There are 7 constituencies that are unrepresented in parliament because of our anachronistic requirement to swear an oath of allegiance to the queen. Those constituencies are entitled to elect who they want and we should not be effectively disenfranchised. because they are republicans. There is something really wrong with that in this day and age and those 7 votes could have been crucial in a number of votes over the last year or so.
On the other hand the prospect of No Deal resulting in a united Ireland might trump other considerations
He did vote remain and for a long time we took a similar view that TM deal was reasonable and that the WDA should have been passed. That remains my view but he has sadly morphed into an extreme brexiteer blinded by IDS and Boris
Things which seem like they could be over quickly can become quite prolonged.
I think it might be targeted at those of us who’ve never flown fast jets.... Looking at the trailer the cinematography looks pretty good; the plot will naturally be ludicrous.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/19/brussels-to-offer-boris-johnson-extension-on-no-deal-brexit
So I see nothing wrong with it as the voters there have made their choice knowing the consequences.
As for the anachronistic oath thing you can easily turn it around and say how silly it is that people wont just do it and cross their fingers or do it while making clear their thoughts on the nature on monarchy and the UK. Some pretty much do already.
Bottom line is though that they are clear on what they will do, voters back them, and they do it, so I am entirely unoutraged.
If they are to bring Boris down over his willingness to no deal, it makes no sense to not take other action necessary to guarantee prevention of no deal, with a new PM.
At the time I said, in a polite way, that this was wrong and that there was "no chance" of a No Deal. I was shouted down.
But the facts remain the same. The House of Commons will not allow No Deal. You can chunter as much as you like. You can gnash your teeth. You can wave all manner of legal parchments at me. But it won't happen.
And secure in that certainty, I bid you all a happy Saturday.
The bottom line is that it would take a very bold, brave and determined PM to flout the will of Parliament on such a major issue, with so much at stake. And has there been any sign of bravery or boldness from the great Bozo to date? Mostly he's been hiding behind the sofa.
Remember we have been told countless times by Leave Tories that the more moderate Tories never match their words with actions . There were also new rebels who have surfaced re stopping no deal.
I accept its not easy to stop no deal if a PM is intent on going there however Thursday was crucial in laying a marker and is a confidence booster to those against no deal.
"There is growing confidence among key member states that a no-deal Brexit can be avoided after the Commons voted this week to prevent the next prime minister, likely to be Johnson, from proroguing parliament."
It will be interesting to see if the next MI films can somehow get more ludicrous without becoming too ludicrous somehow, as that Fast and Furious spin off looks from the 'trying too hard' trailers.
I definitely didn't vote for a "lets annoy the people we still need to negotiate with by doing something utterly insane" No Deal...
I think the hardliners knew that their version of Brexit would not win a referendum so the plan was to dupe the electorate into thinking they would get a good deal and all the other nonsense then hijack the result for their own ends once the vote was in the bag. As soon as the referendum was won then the refrain began that any form of deal was a betraying the Brexit people voted for.
The impression I got was that the advice of the attorney general, Geoffrey Cox, was certainly a stronger factor than that implies, and that she had to follow the expressed wishes of the Commons.
https://www.itv.com/news/2019-03-26/prime-minister-would-break-the-law-if-she-ignores-letwin-result/
As Geoffrey Cox is considered likely to be a key part of the new cabinet it may be not be as clear cut as the PM acting as he might like.
The brains are on the anti no deal side, as is the referee in the speaker. We do not know what their plan is (nor did we in Dec 18 and were told no deal happens if nothing else does) but they may well be able to stop no deal without toppling the govt.
Why do people think that Corbyn would go for an extension if he were able to do so? I don’t believe Corbyn has any interest in negotiating a WA with the EU. Let No Deal happen, blame the Tories and he has a free hand to do whatever he wants.
Anyway I am assuming that No Deal is pretty much inevitable. The Tories will rightly take the blame. I hope they are eviscerated at the next election whenever it comes. And I hope the Lib Dems choose a leader who is able to take advantage of the fact that both Tories and Labour are utterly shite parties led by two of the worst leaders ever inflicted on us.
The extra period of EU membership would be used for renegotiation but could be billed to Conservative Brexiters as an opportunity to prepare further for leaving without a deal.
“It will be described as a technical delay to save Boris from political embarrassment but then we will have time to find an agreement,” said one senior EU diplomat.
It has at least as good a chance as anything in David’s article.
If Corbyn brings us no deal, Labour miss out on most of those votes. If they make it a condition of a GE then they may get most of those votes as they did in GE17.
The number of dramas where everything is done well are infinitesimal; you have to enjoy the bits that are done well or give up on drama altogether.
Plus there is no bigger insult.
No true British patriot would commit this lèse-majesté.
https://twitter.com/UKBrexitParty1/status/1150721420692992005
Then move towards a Canada style FTA with the EU otherwise No Deal until then