In 98 days time the EU will have to put in a border or alternative arrangements on a no deal as the UK will not put a border in place
No wonder Varadker is beginning to panic
1. No deal, the EU loses a lot of money and it’s budget is a total mess. 2. No deal, hits EU economies and businesses 3. No deal, the hit to EU business and jobs will also undermine politicians and governments trying to get re elected.
And all they need to avoid this disaster upon them is to allow technology to be used for customs in conjunction with other checks away from a hard border as a backstop to a deal not being agreed by the end of a lengthy transition that itself can even be extended, thus allowing UK government to narrowly win a vote in HoC.
I agree with you Big G. Anyone betting against BoJo getting a deal by end of October truly are losers.
That..... That's the withdrawal agreement
WDA minus backstop yes.
The backstop is a logical loser. The EU can either have no backstop, no deal, no money etc in a matter of weeks.
Or it can have money, a transition and kick the can on Ireland to years down the road.
Its a no brainer.
We can put a bit more flesh on this. I think EU could kick their problem more than two years down the road by claiming the final deal is all but there, and UK allowing them a transition extension. Easy for Boris if you listen to what he said this morning, he’s already beginning the transition to brexit today, pulling our expertise out of EU to work for Global Britain instead, so two years more of this the place we will be in is something like the anti matter equivalent to BINO, a sort of in the EU in name only where transition extension, so vital for Dublin and EU, matters little to leavers.
Are you sure we're allowed to leave? It's never been done before despite various democratic exercises.
Given that they let us leave in March and we only didn't leave because we asked them for an extension, the answer to your question is "yes, we are allowed to leave".
Although it is possible your question was not sincere.
The Remainer parliament voted that me must ask for an extension.
Anyway, I'm tired, off to bed.
Night all.
The Remainer parliament voted into office by the people...
Elected promising we would Leave. Just in case you forgot that little fact.
Mark Francois on Newsnight says ERG will vote down WDA even without the backstop. The man is quite infuriating and thick.
If Boris can negotiate a backstopless WDA then it should be made a confidence vote. Anyone, whether Grieve or Francois who fails to back that should be expelled from the party.
See, here's the whole problem with Leave... You're happy with a backstopless WDA, Francois and the ERG nutters want a harder Leave, other Leavers were happy with the WDA, some wanted something softer.
It's like 52% voted for a team to win the Premiership and now it turns out they all support different teams.
100% correct. That has been the problem from day one regardless of how much leavers try to blame everyone else.
Mark Francois on Newsnight says ERG will vote down WDA even without the backstop. The man is quite infuriating and thick.
If Boris can negotiate a backstopless WDA then it should be made a confidence vote. Anyone, whether Grieve or Francois who fails to back that should be expelled from the party.
See, here's the whole problem with Leave... You're happy with a backstopless WDA, Francois and the ERG nutters want a harder Leave, other Leavers were happy with the WDA, some wanted something softer.
It's like 52% voted for a team to win the Premiership and now it turns out they all support different teams.
Which doesn't make a team winning the Premiership a bad idea, it just means that one particular team will need to win. I'm quite prepared to accept Francois being on the losing team.
And as a Liverpool fan, I'm quite used to being on the losing team myself. Doesn't mean I wish to abolish having a winner and I don't enjoy the competition even if it ends in a near miss.
But it makes the 48% who voted for one team to win the Premiership the winner.
They didn't vote for one team.
Some voted for a closer union with the EU and membership of Schengen and the Single Currency.
Some voted for the mythical status quo and things staying as they were. The Remainer's very own Unicorn.
Many voted for fear of change and because, even though they didn't particularly like the EU, they believed we would be unable to leave without disruption.
The Remain side were just as split on what they eventually wanted as the Leave side. To claim anything else is just dishonest.
Total revisionism. We know what Remain was. It was exactly what we already had and what we still have.
Are you sure we're allowed to leave? It's never been done before despite various democratic exercises.
Given that they let us leave in March and we only didn't leave because we asked them for an extension, the answer to your question is "yes, we are allowed to leave".
Although it is possible your question was not sincere.
The Remainer parliament voted that me must ask for an extension.
Anyway, I'm tired, off to bed.
Night all.
The Remainer parliament voted into office by the people...
Elected promising we would Leave. Just in case you forgot that little fact.
Parliament is not saying we shouldn’t leave. It’s saying we shouldn’t leave for the sake of it without a good deal.
The betting will be a challenge. Very hard to keep emotion out of it. Especially an election like this one is shaping up to be. And I do now think it's coming soon. Oh god.
A 2019 GE is now odds-on FAV at all leading bookies. Prices been shortening all day.
Anyway. Talk of VONC is moot. Isn't that Parliament in recess for 6 weeks. 6 weeks is a long time in politics. Plenty of time for a shiny new WDA to appear from the force of Boris' optimism.
Yes. i find that if I sit on my arse and do nothing, good stuff magically appears on my lap. It's surprising how often that happens....
I don't think the last 30 hours or so can be described as Boris sitting on his arse doing nothing.
He's been quite bombastic and active with effectively a new government in place already.
Mandy Rice Davies applies to what the EU is saying today, but how they think and what they say in the next six weeks can vary.
We clearly have different opinions on this. I think there will be no changes to the WA (PD is possible, but unlikely).
We may have the makings of a wager. Any thoughts?
I missed this earlier, just saw your comment about be not replying. I'm interested, what are you thinking?
I reckon that there will be no agreed change to the WA before Parliament reconvenes.
Parliament reconvenes is too tight. I would say before we exit. If there are going to be changes they'll be at five minutes to midnight.
Given that any WA needs to change then pass both parliaments before 31 October, 5 minutes to midnight is not going to happen.
I don't agree. It can pass Parliament in a week. The next scheduled European Council is 17-18 October, if there are to be any changes they'll probably be formally agreed then and ratified by both Parliaments in the following week.
OK. If there are substantive changes to the WA (note not PD) by the end of the October European Council I will pay £20 to PB funds, if not, then you do.
Will you accept a binding codicil that changes the backstop as a substantive change? If so, I agree. Will you agree to someone arbitrating if its not crystal clear whether there's been a substantial change or not? If he still does that I would propose Peter_The_Punter but I don't know if he's still online here?
A binding backstop codicil passed by both Westminster parliament and the European parliament would be a substantive change.
Anyway. Talk of VONC is moot. Isn't that Parliament in recess for 6 weeks. 6 weeks is a long time in politics. Plenty of time for a shiny new WDA to appear from the force of Boris' optimism.
Yes. i find that if I sit on my arse and do nothing, good stuff magically appears on my lap. It's surprising how often that happens....
I don't think the last 30 hours or so can be described as Boris sitting on his arse doing nothing.
He's been quite bombastic and active with effectively a new government in place already.
Mandy Rice Davies applies to what the EU is saying today, but how they think and what they say in the next six weeks can vary.
We clearly have different opinions on this. I think there will be no changes to the WA (PD is possible, but unlikely).
We may have the makings of a wager. Any thoughts?
I missed this earlier, just saw your comment about be not replying. I'm interested, what are you thinking?
I reckon that there will be no agreed change to the WA before Parliament reconvenes.
Parliament reconvenes is too tight. I would say before we exit. If there are going to be changes they'll be at five minutes to midnight.
Given that any WA needs to change then pass both parliaments before 31 October, 5 minutes to midnight is not going to happen.
I don't agree. It can pass Parliament in a week. The next scheduled European Council is 17-18 October, if there are to be any changes they'll probably be formally agreed then and ratified by both Parliaments in the following week.
OK. If there are substantive changes to the WA (note not PD) by the end of the October European Council I will pay £20 to PB funds, if not, then you do.
Will you accept a binding codicil that changes the backstop as a substantive change? If so, I agree. Will you agree to someone arbitrating if its not crystal clear whether there's been a substantial change or not? If he still does that I would propose Peter_The_Punter but I don't know if he's still online here?
A binding backstop codicil passed by both Westminster parliament and the European parliament would be a substantive change.
Mark Francois on Newsnight says ERG will vote down WDA even without the backstop. The man is quite infuriating and thick.
If Boris can negotiate a backstopless WDA then it should be made a confidence vote. Anyone, whether Grieve or Francois who fails to back that should be expelled from the party.
See, here's the whole problem with Leave... You're happy with a backstopless WDA, Francois and the ERG nutters want a harder Leave, other Leavers were happy with the WDA, some wanted something softer.
It's like 52% voted for a team to win the Premiership and now it turns out they all support different teams.
Which doesn't make a team winning the Premiership a bad idea, it just means that one particular team will need to win. I'm quite prepared to accept Francois being on the losing team.
And as a Liverpool fan, I'm quite used to being on the losing team myself. Doesn't mean I wish to abolish having a winner and I don't enjoy the competition even if it ends in a near miss.
But it makes the 48% who voted for one team to win the Premiership the winner.
They didn't vote for one team.
Some voted for a closer union with the EU and membership of Schengen and the Single Currency.
Some voted for the mythical status quo and things staying as they were. The Remainer's very own Unicorn.
Many voted for fear of change and because, even though they didn't particularly like the EU, they believed we would be unable to leave without disruption.
The Remain side were just as split on what they eventually wanted as the Leave side. To claim anything else is just dishonest.
Some voted because Leave did not make any logical sense as a practical solution to the problems facing the UK.
Yeah, that's why I brought in McDonnell. The relief that Corbyn is useless is tempered by the knowledge that his perceived harmlessness is a necessary smokescreen to trick people into voting for him and his nutjob Chancellor who most people have never heard of. To say nothing of Seumas Milne et al.
If Corbyn had been viewed as a serious contender for PM at the last election, all those who voted for him because they thought he couldn't possibly win, but wanted to kick the Tories because Brexit, would suddenly have had a huge decision to make.
Which is a long-winded way of saying that, perversely, the more effectual Corbyn appears in the short term, the less of a threat he actually is in the long run. It's probably not a linear relationship though. In short, it's complicated.
It is complicated.
It's like England and the World Cup. We can only do well if nobody expects us to. Soon as we are expected to do well, the players feel it and crumble.
Similar (ish) with Jeremy Corbyn. His best chance of winning is if he gets written off, has no chance, therefore 'safe' to vote for him - bingo.
I like the 10 on betfair for Labour majority. I think they have a great chance in this volatile climate.
I can’t wait for the scenes when reality finally hits and the Brexiteers realise that Britain cannot bully its way to what it wants and the mother of all tantrums erupts.
It would be funny if it wasn’t going to massively affect my future.
More nonsense. The UK voted to leave and that is that. Any “tantrums” are ones like yours. Ridiculous. Entitled. Profoundly anti-democratic.
Mark Francois on Newsnight says ERG will vote down WDA even without the backstop. The man is quite infuriating and thick.
If Boris can negotiate a backstopless WDA then it should be made a confidence vote. Anyone, whether Grieve or Francois who fails to back that should be expelled from the party.
See, here's the whole problem with Leave... You're happy with a backstopless WDA, Francois and the ERG nutters want a harder Leave, other Leavers were happy with the WDA, some wanted something softer.
It's like 52% voted for a team to win the Premiership and now it turns out they all support different teams.
Which doesn't make a team winning the Premiership a bad idea, it just means that one particular team will need to win. I'm quite prepared to accept Francois being on the losing team.
And as a Liverpool fan, I'm quite used to being on the losing team myself. Doesn't mean I wish to abolish having a winner and I don't enjoy the competition even if it ends in a near miss.
But it makes the 48% who voted for one team to win the Premiership the winner.
They didn't vote for one team.
Some voted for a closer union with the EU and membership of Schengen and the Single Currency.
Some voted for the mythical status quo and things staying as they were. The Remainer's very own Unicorn.
Many voted for fear of change and because, even though they didn't particularly like the EU, they believed we would be unable to leave without disruption.
The Remain side were just as split on what they eventually wanted as the Leave side. To claim anything else is just dishonest.
Total revisionism. We know what Remain was. It was exactly what we already had and what we still have.
Brexit is a complete unknown.
Total revisionism. The EU is continually evolving, the idea it would remain frozen in perpetuity as to what it was is a unicorn.
Anyway. Talk of VONC is moot. Isn't that Parliament in recess for 6 weeks. 6 weeks is a long time in politics. Plenty of time for a shiny new WDA to appear from the force of Boris' optimism.
Yes. i find that if I sit on my arse and do nothing, good stuff magically appears on my lap. It's surprising how often that happens....
I don't think the last 30 hours or so can be described as Boris sitting on his arse doing nothing.
He's been quite bombastic and active with effectively a new government in place already.
Mandy Rice Davies applies to what the EU is saying today, but how they think and what they say in the next six weeks can vary.
We clearly have different opinions on this. I think there will be no changes to the WA (PD is possible, but unlikely).
We may have the makings of a wager. Any thoughts?
I missed this earlier, just saw your comment about be not replying. I'm interested, what are you thinking?
I reckon that there will be no agreed change to the WA before Parliament reconvenes.
Parliament reconvenes is too tight. I would say before we exit. If there are going to be changes they'll be at five minutes to midnight.
Given that any WA needs to change then pass both parliaments before 31 October, 5 minutes to midnight is not going to happen.
I don't agree. It can pass Parliament in a week. The next scheduled European Council is 17-18 October, if there are to be any changes they'll probably be formally agreed then and ratified by both Parliaments in the following week.
OK. If there are substantive changes to the WA (note not PD) by the end of the October European Council I will pay £20 to PB funds, if not, then you do.
Will you accept a binding codicil that changes the backstop as a substantive change? If so, I agree. Will you agree to someone arbitrating if its not crystal clear whether there's been a substantial change or not? If he still does that I would propose Peter_The_Punter but I don't know if he's still online here?
A binding backstop codicil passed by both Westminster parliament and the European parliament would be a substantive change.
Don’t take the bet thommo. Boris can get WA passed commons that’s not substantially different.
Hardly an example of fine legislative practice, without the pressing need of an unavoidable emegency (given the problem has been parliament refusing to say yes to anything), but people joyous at that bill can hardly bemoan others using the same tactic if they can.
Mark Francois on Newsnight says ERG will vote down WDA even without the backstop. The man is quite infuriating and thick.
If Boris can negotiate a backstopless WDA then it should be made a confidence vote. Anyone, whether Grieve or Francois who fails to back that should be expelled from the party.
See, here's the whole problem with Leave... You're happy with a backstopless WDA, Francois and the ERG nutters want a harder Leave, other Leavers were happy with the WDA, some wanted something softer.
It's like 52% voted for a team to win the Premiership and now it turns out they all support different teams.
Which doesn't make a team winning the Premiership a bad idea, it just means that one particular team will need to win. I'm quite prepared to accept Francois being on the losing team.
And as a Liverpool fan, I'm quite used to being on the losing team myself. Doesn't mean I wish to abolish having a winner and I don't enjoy the competition even if it ends in a near miss.
But it makes the 48% who voted for one team to win the Premiership the winner.
They didn't vote for one team.
Some voted for a closer union with the EU and membership of Schengen and the Single Currency.
Some voted for the mythical status quo and things staying as they were. The Remainer's very own Unicorn.
Many voted for fear of change and because, even though they didn't particularly like the EU, they believed we would be unable to leave without disruption.
The Remain side were just as split on what they eventually wanted as the Leave side. To claim anything else is just dishonest.
Total revisionism. We know what Remain was. It was exactly what we already had and what we still have.
Brexit is a complete unknown.
Total revisionism. The EU is continually evolving, the idea it would remain frozen in perpetuity as to what it was is a unicorn.
Only at the behest of our sovereign, elected parliament.
Are you sure we're allowed to leave? It's never been done before despite various democratic exercises.
Given that they let us leave in March and we only didn't leave because we asked them for an extension, the answer to your question is "yes, we are allowed to leave".
Although it is possible your question was not sincere.
The Remainer parliament voted that me must ask for an extension.
Anyway, I'm tired, off to bed.
Night all.
The Remainer parliament voted into office by the people...
Under false pretences. Something like 80% by memory of MPs were elected on a manifesto pledge of respecting the referendum result and actually leaving. Closer to 95% of English MPs from memory.
Since the Remainer MPs pretended to be Leavers in order to get elected, lied to the electorate, then changed their colours after the election, a new election could be just what we need. Without Grieve and co polluting the blue team.
The majority of voters backed parties that made clear they opposed to No Deal
We've been over this, the majority of voters backed parties that made clear they opposed absolutely everything.
Don't say what a majority oppose, because in our divided politics that's everything, start with what a majority supported and work from there.
A majority supported parties that made clear they opposed no deal.
A majority supported parties that promised to leave. There were no codicils.
Are you sure we're allowed to leave? It's never been done before despite various democratic exercises.
Given that they let us leave in March and we only didn't leave because we asked them for an extension, the answer to your question is "yes, we are allowed to leave".
Although it is possible your question was not sincere.
The Remainer parliament voted that me must ask for an extension.
Anyway, I'm tired, off to bed.
Night all.
The Remainer parliament voted into office by the people...
Under false pretences. Something like 80% by memory of MPs were elected on a manifesto pledge of respecting the referendum result and actually leaving. Closer to 95% of English MPs from memory.
Since the Remainer MPs pretended to be Leavers in order to get elected, lied to the electorate, then changed their colours after the election, a new election could be just what we need. Without Grieve and co polluting the blue team.
The majority of voters backed parties that made clear they opposed to No Deal
We've been over this, the majority of voters backed parties that made clear they opposed absolutely everything.
Don't say what a majority oppose, because in our divided politics that's everything, start with what a majority supported and work from there.
A majority supported parties that made clear they opposed no deal.
A majority supported parties that made clear they opposed remaining.
Yep - so we have to get a deal. No Deal has no mándate.
Anyway. Talk of VONC is moot. Isn't that Parliament in recess for 6 weeks. 6 weeks is a long time in politics. Plenty of time for a shiny new WDA to appear from the force of Boris' optimism.
Yes. i find that if I sit on my arse and do nothing, good stuff magically appears on my lap. It's surprising how often that happens....
I don't think the
We clearly have different opinions on this. I think there will be no changes to the WA (PD is possible, but unlikely).
We may have the makings of a wager. Any thoughts?
I missed this earlier, just saw your comment about be not replying. I'm interested, what are you thinking?
I reckon that there will be no agreed change to the WA before Parliament reconvenes.
Parliament reconvenes is too tight. I would say before we exit. If there are going to be changes they'll be at five minutes to midnight.
Given that any WA needs to change then pass both parliaments before 31 October, 5 minutes to midnight is not going to happen.
I don't agree. It can pass Parliament in a week. The next scheduled European Council is 17-18 October, if there are to be any changes they'll probably be formally agreed then and ratified by both Parliaments in the following week.
OK. If there are substantive changes to the WA (note not PD) by the end of the October European Council I will pay £20 to PB funds, if not, then you do.
Will you accept a binding codicil that changes the backstop as a substantive change? If so, I agree. Will you agree to someone arbitrating if its not crystal clear whether there's been a substantial change or not? If he still does that I would propose Peter_The_Punter but I don't know if he's still online here?
A binding backstop codicil passed by both Westminster parliament and the European parliament would be a substantive change.
Then you have a deal.
We're on. Mike and TSE can look forward to a piping hot pineapple pizza from one of us.
I can’t wait for the scenes when reality finally hits and the Brexiteers realise that Britain cannot bully its way to what it wants and the mother of all tantrums erupts.
It would be funny if it wasn’t going to massively affect my future.
More nonsense. The UK voted to leave and that is that. Any “tantrums” are ones like yours. Ridiculous. Entitled. Profoundly anti-democratic.
And I write as someone who voted “remain”.
Your response is completely irrelevant to what I posted.
Britain cannot bully the EU into a deal without the backstop. Its as simple as that.
Mark Francois on Newsnight says ERG will vote down WDA even without the backstop. The man is quite infuriating and thick.
If Boris can negotiate a backstopless WDA then it should be made a confidence vote. Anyone, whether Grieve or Francois who fails to back that should be expelled from the party.
See, here's the whole problem with Leave... You're happy with a backstopless WDA, Francois and the ERG nutters want a harder Leave, other Leavers were happy with the WDA, some wanted something softer.
It's like 52% voted for a team to win the Premiership and now it turns out they all support different teams.
Which doesn't make a team winning the Premiership a bad idea, it just means that one particular team will need to win. I'm quite prepared to accept Francois being on the losing team.
And as a Liverpool fan, I'm quite used to being on the losing team myself. Doesn't mean I wish to abolish having a winner and I don't enjoy the competition even if it ends in a near miss.
But it makes the 48% who voted for one team to win the Premiership the winner.
They didn't vote for one team.
Some voted for a closer union with the EU and membership of Schengen and the Single Currency.
Some voted for the mythical status quo and things staying as they were. The Remainer's very own Unicorn.
Many voted for fear of change and because, even though they didn't particularly like the EU, they believed we would be unable to leave without disruption.
The Remain side were just as split on what they eventually wanted as the Leave side. To claim anything else is just dishonest.
Your trying to revise the past. I don’t know a single Remainer who voted in the hope of getting the Euro etc.
And there’s a lock , re any further changes which would need a referendum . Cameron’s negotiation was trashed by the right wing press even before the ink had dried . If Bozo had got that he’d have been a hero .
The fact is that such a fundamental change scraped over the line and only won because people expected a deal . Indeed when polled just after the EU ref Leavers had a range of views , some staying in the single market etc .
If no deal had been on the side of a bus Vote Leave would have lost . If the UK is to leave with no deal it needs a mandate . If that’s what Leavers want they can vote for it.
Hardly an example of fine legislative practice, without the pressing need of an unavoidable emegency (given the problem has been parliament refusing to say yes to anything), but people joyous at that bill can hardly bemoan others using the same tactic if they can.
Being 9 days from Hard Brexit day if the deal isn't ratified is an unavoidable deadline. If an agreement is reached on 18 April I expect both Parliaments will ratify it within a week [so 25 April]
Yeah, that's why I brought in McDonnell. The relief that Corbyn is useless is tempered by the knowledge that his perceived harmlessness is a necessary smokescreen to trick people into voting for him and his nutjob Chancellor who most people have never heard of. To say nothing of Seumas Milne et al.
If Corbyn had been viewed as a serious contender for PM at the last election, all those who voted for him because they thought he couldn't possibly win, but wanted to kick the Tories because Brexit, would suddenly have had a huge decision to make.
Which is a long-winded way of saying that, perversely, the more effectual Corbyn appears in the short term, the less of a threat he actually is in the long run. It's probably not a linear relationship though. In short, it's complicated.
It is complicated.
It's like England and the World Cup. We can only do well if nobody expects us to. Soon as we are expected to do well, the players feel it and crumble.
Similar (ish) with Jeremy Corbyn. His best chance of winning is if he gets written off, has no chance, therefore 'safe' to vote for him - bingo.
I like the 10 on betfair for Labour majority. I think they have a great chance in this volatile climate.
But hush - don't tell anyone.
Your secret is safe with me.
Personally I think they're more likely to finish third than win a majority (although I could see them getting more seats than the LDs with a smaller vote share.
Your characterisation of Jeremy Corbyn as the personification of quintessential Englishness is an interesting one. Perhaps not one the man himself might relish.
Are you sure we're allowed to leave? It's never been done before despite various democratic exercises.
Given that they let us leave in March and we only didn't leave because we asked them for an extension, the answer to your question is "yes, we are allowed to leave".
Although it is possible your question was not sincere.
The Remainer parliament voted that me must ask for an extension.
Anyway, I'm tired, off to bed.
Night all.
The Remainer parliament voted into office by the people...
Elected promising we would Leave. Just in case you forgot that little fact.
Did the voters believe the politicians actually meant that bit of the manifesto the politician was standing on? Is a GE vote for a rep, who you may know is staunch remain, or is it a vote for that bit of the manifesto?
I can’t wait for the scenes when reality finally hits and the Brexiteers realise that Britain cannot bully its way to what it wants and the mother of all tantrums erupts.
It would be funny if it wasn’t going to massively affect my future.
More nonsense. The UK voted to leave and that is that. Any “tantrums” are ones like yours. Ridiculous. Entitled. Profoundly anti-democratic.
And I write as someone who voted “remain”.
Your response is completely irrelevant to what I posted.
Britain cannot bully the EU into a deal without the backstop. Its as simple as that.
Indeed it would make an interesting market on BFx to see if Boris can get changes to the WA. How to get that set up?
Yeah, that's why I brought in McDonnell. The relief that Corbyn is useless is tempered by the knowledge that his perceived harmlessness is a necessary smokescreen to trick people into voting for him and his nutjob Chancellor who most people have never heard of. To say nothing of Seumas Milne et al.
If Corbyn had been viewed as a serious contender for PM at the last election, all those who voted for him because they thought he couldn't possibly win, but wanted to kick the Tories because Brexit, would suddenly have had a huge decision to make.
Which is a long-winded way of saying that, perversely, the more effectual Corbyn appears in the short term, the less of a threat he actually is in the long run. It's probably not a linear relationship though. In short, it's complicated.
It is complicated.
It's like England and the World Cup. We can only do well if nobody expects us to. Soon as we are expected to do well, the players feel it and crumble.
Similar (ish) with Jeremy Corbyn. His best chance of winning is if he gets written off, has no chance, therefore 'safe' to vote for him - bingo.
I like the 10 on betfair for Labour majority. I think they have a great chance in this volatile climate.
But hush - don't tell anyone.
Your secret is safe with me.
Personally I think they're more likely to finish third than win a majority (although I could see them getting more seats than the LDs with a smaller vote share.
Your characterisation of Jeremy Corbyn as the personification of quintessential Englishness is an interesting one. Perhaps not one the man himself might relish.
I think Jezza is a quintisential English eccentric.
I don't think Lab majority at 10 is value, too many gains needed, and SLAB more likely to lose seats.
Are you sure we're allowed to leave? It's never been done before despite various democratic exercises.
Given that they let us leave in March and we only didn't leave because we asked them for an extension, the answer to your question is "yes, we are allowed to leave".
Although it is possible your question was not sincere.
The Remainer parliament voted that me must ask for an extension.
Anyway, I'm tired, off to bed.
Night all.
The Remainer parliament voted into office by the people...
Under false pretences. Something like 80% by memory of MPs were elected on a manifesto pledge of respecting the referendum result and actually leaving. Closer to 95% of English MPs from memory.
Since the Remainer MPs pretended to be Leavers in order to get elected, lied to the electorate, then changed their colours after the election, a new election could be just what we need. Without Grieve and co polluting the blue team.
The majority of voters backed parties that made clear they opposed to No Deal
We've been over this, the majority of voters backed parties that made clear they opposed absolutely everything.
Don't say what a majority oppose, because in our divided politics that's everything, start with what a majority supported and work from there.
A majority supported parties that made clear they opposed no deal.
A majority supported parties that made clear they opposed remaining.
Yep - so we have to get a deal. No Deal has no mándate.
Are you sure we're allowed to leave? It's never been done before despite various democratic exercises.
Given that they let us leave in March and we only didn't leave because we asked them for an extension, the answer to your question is "yes, we are allowed to leave".
Although it is possible your question was not sincere.
The Remainer parliament voted that me must ask for an extension.
Anyway, I'm tired, off to bed.
Night all.
The Remainer parliament voted into office by the people...
Elected promising we would Leave. Just in case you forgot that little fact.
Did the voters believe the politicians actually meant that bit of the manifesto the politician was standing on? Is a GE vote for a rep, who you may know is staunch remain, or is it a vote for that bit of the manifesto?
The vast majority of the MPs put the statement that we would leave into their personal literature, not just hung off the back of the party manifesto. For example all three of the Tory MPs who quit to join change UK made it explicit in their campaign literature that they supported Britain leaving the EU since that was what we had voted for.
Are you sure we're allowed to leave? It's never been done before despite various democratic exercises.
Given that they let us leave in March and we only didn't leave because we asked them for an extension, the answer to your question is "yes, we are allowed to leave".
Although it is possible your question was not sincere.
The Remainer parliament voted that me must ask for an extension.
Anyway, I'm tired, off to bed.
Night all.
The Remainer parliament voted into office by the people...
Elected promising we would Leave. Just in case you forgot that little fact.
Did the voters believe the politicians actually meant that bit of the manifesto the politician was standing on? Is a GE vote for a rep, who you may know is staunch remain, or is it a vote for that bit of the manifesto?
The vast majority of the MPs put the statement that we would leave into their personal literature, not just hung off the back of the party manifesto. For example all three of the Tory MPs who quit to join change UK made it explicit in their campaign literature that they supported Britain leaving the EU since that was what we had voted for.
Exactly. The only [still wants to] Remain Tory MP I respect is Ken Clarke since he was unequivocally clear.
Mark Francois on Newsnight says ERG will vote down WDA even without the backstop. The man is quite infuriating and thick.
If Boris can negotiate a backstopless WDA then it should be made a confidence vote. Anyone, whether Grieve or Francois who fails to back that should be expelled from the party.
See, here's the whole problem with Leave... You're happy with a backstopless WDA, Francois and the ERG nutters want a harder Leave, other Leavers were happy with the WDA, some wanted something softer.
It's like 52% voted for a team to win the Premiership and now it turns out they all support different teams.
Which doesn't make a team winning the Premiership a bad idea, it just means that one particular team will need to win. I'm quite prepared to accept Francois being on the losing team.
And as a Liverpool fan, I'm quite used to being on the losing team myself. Doesn't mean I wish to abolish having a winner and I don't enjoy the competition even if it ends in a near miss.
But it makes the 48% who voted for one team to win the Premiership the winner.
They didn't vote for one team.
Some voted for a closer union with the EU and membership of Schengen and the Single Currency.
Some voted for the mythical status quo and things staying as they were. The Remainer's very own Unicorn.
Many voted for fear of change and because, even though they didn't particularly like the EU, they believed we would be unable to leave without disruption.
The Remain side were just as split on what they eventually wanted as the Leave side. To claim anything else is just dishonest.
Your trying to revise the past. I don’t know a single Remainer who voted in the hope of getting the Euro etc.
And there’s a lock , re any further changes which would need a referendum . Cameron’s negotiation was trashed by the right wing press even before the ink had dried . If Bozo had got that he’d have been a hero .
The fact is that such a fundamental change scraped over the line and only won because people expected a deal . Indeed when polled just after the EU ref Leavers had a range of views , some staying in the single market etc .
If no deal had been on the side of a bus Vote Leave would have lost . If the UK is to leave with no deal it needs a mandate . If that’s what Leavers want they can vote for it.
Williamglenn of this parish has made it explicitly clear on many occasions that is what he hoped for and still hopes for. And unlike you I know plenty of others who were of a similar mind.
Mark Francois on Newsnight says ERG will vote down WDA even without the backstop. The man is quite infuriating and thick.
If Boris can negotiate a backstopless WDA then it should be made a confidence vote. Anyone, whether Grieve or Francois who fails to back that should be expelled from the party.
See, here's the whole problem with Leave... You're happy with a backstopless WDA, Francois and the ERG nutters want a harder Leave, other Leavers were happy with the WDA, some wanted something softer.
It's like 52% voted for a team to win the Premiership and now it turns out they all support different teams.
Which doesn't make a team winning the Premiership a bad idea, it just means that one particular team will need to win. I'm quite prepared to accept Francois being on the losing team.
And as a Liverpool fan, I'm quite used to being on the losing team myself. Doesn't mean I wish to abolish having a winner and I don't enjoy the competition even if it ends in a near miss.
But it makes the 48% who voted for one team to win the Premiership the winner.
They didn't vote for one team.
Some voted for a closer union with the EU and membership of Schengen and the Single Currency.
Some voted for the mythical status quo and things staying as they were. The Remainer's very own Unicorn.
Many voted for fear of change and because, even though they didn't particularly like the EU, they believed we would be unable to leave without disruption.
The Remain side were just as split on what they eventually wanted as the Leave side. To claim anything else is just dishonest.
Total revisionism. We know what Remain was. It was exactly what we already had and what we still have.
Brexit is a complete unknown.
You are sounding ever more desperate Gallowgate. Point out to me what is false in what I wrote. Otherwise accept you are talking garbage.
Mark Francois on Newsnight says ERG will vote down WDA even without the backstop. The man is quite infuriating and thick.
If Boris can negotiate a backstopless WDA then it should be made a confidence vote. Anyone, whether Grieve or Francois who fails to back that should be expelled from the party.
See, here's the whole problem with Leave... You're happy with a backstopless WDA, Francois and the ERG nutters want a harder Leave, other Leavers were happy with the WDA, some wanted something softer.
It's like 52% voted for a team to win the Premiership and now it turns out they all support different teams.
Which doesn't make a team winning the Premiership a bad idea, it just means that one particular team will need to win. I'm quite prepared to accept Francois being on the losing team.
And as a Liverpool fan, I'm quite used to being on the losing team myself. Doesn't mean I wish to abolish having a winner and I don't enjoy the competition even if it ends in a near miss.
But it makes the 48% who voted for one team to win the Premiership the winner.
They didn't vote for one team.
Some voted for a closer union with the EU and membership of Schengen and the Single Currency.
Some voted for the mythical status quo and things staying as they were. The Remainer's very own Unicorn.
Many voted for fear of change and because, even though they didn't particularly like the EU, they believed we would be unable to leave without disruption.
The Remain side were just as split on what they eventually wanted as the Leave side. To claim anything else is just dishonest.
Total revisionism. We know what Remain was. It was exactly what we already had and what we still have.
Brexit is a complete unknown.
You are sounding ever more desperate Gallowgate. Point out to me what is false in what I wrote. Otherwise accept you are talking garbage.
Mark Francois on Newsnight says ERG will vote down WDA even without the backstop. The man is quite infuriating and thick.
If Boris can negotiate a backstopless WDA then it should be made a confidence vote. Anyone, whether Grieve or Francois who fails to back that should be expelled from the party.
See, here's the whole problem with Leave... You're happy with a backstopless WDA, Francois and the ERG nutters want a harder Leave, other Leavers were happy with the WDA, some wanted something softer.
It's like 52% voted for a team to win the Premiership and now it turns out they all support different teams.
Which doesn't make a team winning the Premiership a bad idea, it just means that one particular team will need to win. I'm quite prepared to accept Francois being on the losing team.
And as a Liverpool fan, I'm quite used to being on the losing team myself. Doesn't mean I wish to abolish having a winner and I don't enjoy the competition even if it ends in a near miss.
But it makes the 48% who voted for one team to win the Premiership the winner.
They didn't vote for one team.
Some voted for a closer union with the EU and membership of Schengen and the Single Currency.
Some voted for the mythical status quo and things staying as they were. The Remainer's very own Unicorn.
Many voted for fear of change and because, even though they didn't particularly like the EU, they believed we would be unable to leave without disruption.
The Remain side were just as split on what they eventually wanted as the Leave side. To claim anything else is just dishonest.
Total revisionism. We know what Remain was. It was exactly what we already had and what we still have.
Brexit is a complete unknown.
You are sounding ever more desperate Gallowgate. Point out to me what is false in what I wrote. Otherwise accept you are talking garbage.
Yawn.
Are you tired old chap? Not surprising given how much BS you have been shovelling out this evening.
I can’t wait for the scenes when reality finally hits and the Brexiteers realise that Britain cannot bully its way to what it wants and the mother of all tantrums erupts.
It would be funny if it wasn’t going to massively affect my future.
More nonsense. The UK voted to leave and that is that. Any “tantrums” are ones like yours. Ridiculous. Entitled. Profoundly anti-democratic.
And I write as someone who voted “remain”.
Your response is completely irrelevant to what I posted.
Britain cannot bully the EU into a deal without the backstop. Its as simple as that.
The cool thing about a Johnson premiership is we get to find out which one of you is right.
Are you sure we're allowed to leave? It's never been done before despite various democratic exercises.
Given that they let us leave in March and we only didn't leave because we asked them for an extension, the answer to your question is "yes, we are allowed to leave".
Although it is possible your question was not sincere.
The Remainer parliament voted that me must ask for an extension.
Anyway, I'm tired, off to bed.
Night all.
The Remainer parliament voted into office by the people...
Elected promising we would Leave. Just in case you forgot that little fact.
Did the voters believe the politicians actually meant that bit of the manifesto the politician was standing on? Is a GE vote for a rep, who you may know is staunch remain, or is it a vote for that bit of the manifesto?
I think BREXIT was more than just a "bit" of the manifesto, but then you contend the manifesto to be meaningless to the stupid hoi polloi. In your view presumably, preferring messages on buses whilst refusing to be cowed by establishment punishment threats re queues and budgets.
Whatever people stood on in 2017 is rapidly obsolete. There is an unprecedented number of MPs who have shed their Party let alone what they stood on. AFAIK none of them stood promising No Deal of any kind. Which, given the past 24 hours is the only Leave option realistically in view.
I can’t wait for the scenes when reality finally hits and the Brexiteers realise that Britain cannot bully its way to what it wants and the mother of all tantrums erupts.
It would be funny if it wasn’t going to massively affect my future.
More nonsense. The UK voted to leave and that is that. Any “tantrums” are ones like yours. Ridiculous. Entitled. Profoundly anti-democratic.
And I write as someone who voted “remain”.
Your response is completely irrelevant to what I posted.
Britain cannot bully the EU into a deal without the backstop. Its as simple as that.
The cool thing about a Johnson premiership is we get to find out which one of you is right.
And now May has gone, the EU may not find it so easy to bully the UK.
Whatever people stood on in 2017 is rapidly obsolete. There is an unprecedented number of MPs who have shed their Party let alone what they stood on. AFAIK none of them stood promising No Deal of any kind. Which, given the past 24 hours is the only Leave option realistically in view.
How is no deal not BREXIT. If that's all that's on offer (and Parliament has thrice rejected the only deal that the EU says is acceptable to them) then it's the only LEAVE option available.
Whatever people stood on in 2017 is rapidly obsolete. There is an unprecedented number of MPs who have shed their Party let alone what they stood on. AFAIK none of them stood promising No Deal of any kind. Which, given the past 24 hours is the only Leave option realistically in view.
How is no deal not BREXIT. If that's all that's on offer (and Parliament has thrice rejected the only deal that the EU says is acceptable to them) then it's the only LEAVE option available.
Did I say it wasn't Brexit? However, arguments about what people did or didn't stand on are irrelevant, as not a single MP stood for election on that basis. It is rather like standing on the basis of not letting, for example, Indonesia push us around. Then arguing that means we should engage in a thermonuclear obliteration of the archipelago.
My problem with Corbyn was well-established long before he became leader and has little to do with his policies. It has to do with his character, his association with anti-semites and men of violence, his default instincts which seem to be to be illiberal and not democratic and the particular strand of the hard left he comes from and has spent all his political life in.
A Left leader who had strongly redistributive policies (a wealth tax, say, or high taxes to pay for public spending) but who does not come from the SWP strand that Corbyn seems to and who was effective in holding a government to account would be much better than an ineffectual moderate. So I voted for Neil Kinnock, who came from the Left. I would have voted for John Smith.
That is quite convincing. I'm buying it, I think. Yes - bought.
But I bet you have moved to the right since you voted for Kinnock - i.e. you are comparing apples (you 30 years ago) to pears (you today). As it were.
To the right on some things - economic competence matters to me. But to the left on others - I have become much more socially liberal, much greener - and I dislike the move to a 19th century sort of economy (insecurity at the bottom, tremendous wealth at the top and a disdain for people outside one’s immediate circle). I am very keen on freedom of speech / civil rights, trial by jury, innocent until proven guilty etc: traditional liberal causes, which do not seem to me to be much supported by the left. Loathe ID cards. And I do believe in communities, the nation, society. I have a healthy scepticism of the state, any sort of power really. The state should be the servant of the people not its master. No idea where that puts me on the spectrum. But feel quite disgusted by both main parties currently.
Anyway having successfully managed to sell something to an ex-investment banker (even one from Lehmans!) it’s time for bed. 31degrees here at midnight!
My problem with Corbyn was well-established long before he became leader and has little to do with his policies. It has to do with his character, his association with anti-semites and men of violence, his default instincts which seem to be to be illiberal and not democratic and the particular strand of the hard left he comes from and has spent all his political life in.
A Left leader who had strongly redistributive policies (a wealth tax, say, or high taxes to pay for public spending) but who does not come from the SWP strand that Corbyn seems to and who was effective in holding a government to account would be much better than an ineffectual moderate. So I voted for Neil Kinnock, who came from the Left. I would have voted for John Smith.
That is quite convincing. I'm buying it, I think. Yes - bought.
But I bet you have moved to the right since you voted for Kinnock - i.e. you are comparing apples (you 30 years ago) to pears (you today). As it were.
To the right on some things - economic competence matters to me. But to the left on others - I have become much more socially liberal, much greener - and I dislike the move to a 19th century sort of economy (insecurity at the bottom, tremendous wealth at the top and a disdain for people outside one’s immediate circle). I am very keen on freedom of speech / civil rights, trial by jury, innocent until proven guilty etc: traditional liberal causes, which do not seem to me to be much supported by the left. Loathe ID cards. And I do believe in communities, the nation, society. I have a healthy scepticism of the state, any sort of power really. The state should be the servant of the people not its master. No idea where that puts me on the spectrum. But feel quite disgusted by both main parties currently.
Anyway having successfully managed to sell something to an ex-investment banker (even one from Lehmans!) it’s time for bed. 31degrees here at midnight!
New Labour were very authoritarian but it was the left that opposed many of Blairs anti civil liberty measures, it is where many of Corbyn's much criticised rebellions come from.
It is one thing that attracted me to the Labour left, less of an authoritarian view and more respect for civil liberties.
Whatever people stood on in 2017 is rapidly obsolete. There is an unprecedented number of MPs who have shed their Party let alone what they stood on. AFAIK none of them stood promising No Deal of any kind. Which, given the past 24 hours is the only Leave option realistically in view.
How is no deal not BREXIT. If that's all that's on offer (and Parliament has thrice rejected the only deal that the EU says is acceptable to them) then it's the only LEAVE option available.
In voting for leave people were implicitly voting to leave if necessary without an agreement first being in place with the EU. It is not credible to regard a vote for leave as a vote to ask the EU for permission to leave, with the EU able to withhold that permission simply by failing to offer anything but entirely unreasonable terms or even by offering nothing at all. It is also the case that if we leave without an agreement being in place first, we can seek one once we have left.
Comments
Brexit is a complete unknown.
It's like England and the World Cup. We can only do well if nobody expects us to. Soon as we are expected to do well, the players feel it and crumble.
Similar (ish) with Jeremy Corbyn. His best chance of winning is if he gets written off, has no chance, therefore 'safe' to vote for him - bingo.
I like the 10 on betfair for Labour majority. I think they have a great chance in this volatile climate.
But hush - don't tell anyone.
And I write as someone who voted “remain”.
Britain cannot bully the EU into a deal without the backstop. Its as simple as that.
And there’s a lock , re any further changes which would need a referendum . Cameron’s negotiation was trashed by the right wing press even before the ink had dried . If Bozo had got that he’d have been a hero .
The fact is that such a fundamental change scraped over the line and only won because people expected a deal . Indeed when polled just after the EU ref Leavers had a range of views , some staying in the single market etc .
If no deal had been on the side of a bus Vote Leave would have lost . If the UK is to leave with no deal it needs a mandate . If that’s what Leavers want they can vote for it.
Personally I think they're more likely to finish third than win a majority (although I could see them getting more seats than the LDs with a smaller vote share.
Your characterisation of Jeremy Corbyn as the personification of quintessential Englishness is an interesting one. Perhaps not one the man himself might relish.
I don't think Lab majority at 10 is value, too many gains needed, and SLAB more likely to lose seats.
It is you who are indulging in revisionism.
The day is coming.
Which, given the past 24 hours is the only Leave option realistically in view.
WOW! He's is going to absolutely wipe the floor with Jezza in the Autumn general election isn't he?
It is rather like standing on the basis of not letting, for example, Indonesia push us around. Then arguing that means we should engage in a thermonuclear obliteration of the archipelago.
Anyway having successfully managed to sell something to an ex-investment banker (even one from Lehmans!) it’s time for bed. 31degrees here at midnight!
For perspective:
https://twitter.com/leighboobyer/status/1154506119483576320?s=21
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1154535318017708033?s=21
It is one thing that attracted me to the Labour left, less of an authoritarian view and more respect for civil liberties.