She had three opportunities to vote for an orderly Brexit. Each time she voted no.
Quite. If mature now means vote according to the party line and cry crocodile tears afterwards then there are a large number of mature MPs out there. That opinion may be a brave one.
She had three opportunities to vote for an orderly Brexit. Each time she voted no.
Quite. If mature now means vote according to the party line and cry crocodile tears afterwards then there are a large number of mature MPs out there. That opinion may be a brave one.
She had three opportunities to vote for an orderly Brexit. Each time she voted no.
Quite. If mature now means vote according to the party line and cry crocodile tears afterwards then there are a large number of mature MPs out there. That opinion may be a brave one.
Why should anybody vote for a Tory brexit. You all fail to accept that the government is a conservative one with DUP c&s they have the majority in parliament. It is their responsibility to vote for the governments policy. If they don’t then it has absolutely nothing to do with anybody else for their failure. Oppositions oppose, governments propose legislation that they are supposed to know can attract a majority. No matter how you spin it blame lies solely with the ERG, DUP and the rest of the Conservative party. Time to let the eat their own shit
Corbyn says next week is the last chance to stop a nodeal Brexit. I assume he’s ruled out whipping his MPs to vote for May’s deal then...
Also, what can be done next week that definitively can’t be done between Oct 15th and Oct 31st?
I assume it's like the old "24 hours to save the NHS" chestnut.
The EU summit is on October 17th - I suspect that has a lot to do with it.
Can't A50 be revoked up until October 31st if the PM was so inclined?
Yes as long as it is not obvious that the intention is to not then reverse the decision the next day and start the two years over again without some fundamental moves to change the status quo
That proviso was part of the recommendation of the advisor to the ECJ but it was not included in the final judgement so in principle a PM could indeed revoke one day and reinvoke the next. But it would a really stupid thing to do. Continue the uncertainty and piss off the EU as well.
This site is nowadays astro-turfed with articles with the monotonously same message ("BoJo is a moron", "Brexit is madness", "Leavers are morons, idiots or worse", "Farage is fascist" " "The tories will be defeated" etc etc etc...).
Not how I've read them but if you want to write something non-bonkers and send it to OGH he'll generally publish other takes...
You show me an article here that is pro-Brexit, Pro-Bojo and pro the suspension of 4 days of Parliament's sitting. There are plenty of articles in the rest of the mainstream press. Even the Guardian occasionally runs such an article.
Never on PB. Never.....
The obvious solution is to write one yourself instead of whingeing about it. As far as I understand it anyone can submit a piece and so long as it's of sufficient quality I expect it will be published. It's not up to OGH to go looking for pro-Johnson, pro-prorogation, pro No Deal articles if people that hold those views can't be arsed to write an article.
Corbyn says next week is the last chance to stop a nodeal Brexit. I assume he’s ruled out whipping his MPs to vote for May’s deal then...
Also, what can be done next week that definitively can’t be done between Oct 15th and Oct 31st?
I assume it's like the old "24 hours to save the NHS" chestnut.
The EU summit is on October 17th - I suspect that has a lot to do with it.
Can't A50 be revoked up until October 31st if the PM was so inclined?
Yes as long as it is not obvious that the intention is to not then reverse the decision the next day and start the two years over again without some fundamental moves to change the status quo
That proviso was part of the recommendation of the advisor to the ECJ but it was not included in the final judgement so in principle a PM could indeed revoke one day and reinvoke the next. But it would a really stupid thing to do. Continue the uncertainty and piss off the EU as well.
Ok missed the final part obviously failed to keep up,
She had three opportunities to vote for an orderly Brexit. Each time she voted no.
Quite. If mature now means vote according to the party line and cry crocodile tears afterwards then there are a large number of mature MPs out there. That opinion may be a brave one.
Why should anybody vote for a Tory brexit. You all fail to accept that the government is a conservative one with DUP c&s they have the majority in parliament. It is their responsibility to vote for the governments policy. If they don’t then it has absolutely nothing to do with anybody else for their failure. Oppositions oppose, governments propose legislation that they are supposed to know can attract a majority. No matter how you spin it blame lies solely with the ERG, DUP and the rest of the Conservative party. Time to let the eat their own shit
Which part of the WA would Labour change? That's the only bit that matters. The PD is just window dressing.
This site is nowadays astro-turfed with articles with the monotonously same message ("BoJo is a moron", "Brexit is madness", "Leavers are morons, idiots or worse", "Farage is fascist" " "The tories will be defeated" etc etc etc...).
Not how I've read them but if you want to write something non-bonkers and send it to OGH he'll generally publish other takes...
You show me an article here that is pro-Brexit, Pro-Bojo and pro the suspension of 4 days of Parliament's sitting. There are plenty of articles in the rest of the mainstream press. Even the Guardian occasionally runs such an article.
She had three opportunities to vote for an orderly Brexit. Each time she voted no.
Quite. If mature now means vote according to the party line and cry crocodile tears afterwards then there are a large number of mature MPs out there. That opinion may be a brave one.
Why should anybody vote for a Tory brexit. You all fail to accept that the government is a conservative one with DUP c&s they have the majority in parliament. It is their responsibility to vote for the governments policy. If they don’t then it has absolutely nothing to do with anybody else for their failure. Oppositions oppose, governments propose legislation that they are supposed to know can attract a majority. No matter how you spin it blame lies solely with the ERG, DUP and the rest of the Conservative party. Time to let the eat their own shit
Which part of the WA would Labour change? That's the only bit that matters. The PD is just window dressing.
Probably nothing the way I read the situation was that the PD was not legally binding and nobody could trust anything that was intimated that could be included. So for example, on the extreme, if May had promised a Customs Union to be included in the PD then any successor could rip it up. So effectively voting for the WA gave any future Tory leader a blank cheque, I might be wrong but that was how I read it.
Kudos for Boris if it is true he is making Brexit a confidence issue - it definitely should be and it was a sign of the weakness of May that she didn't do the same and the arrogance and delusional nature of her that she thought she could continue with it after those colossal defeats.
I've said all along damn the FTPA it should be possible still to act as if something this important is a confidence motion and treat it the same. Too right if it is being done now, that is the only mature solution to this mess.
Yes barring Hammond etc from standing again may remove the majority. So be it. The majority hasn't really been there all along and if a confidence motion can't command a majority of the house then again damn the FTPA there should be an election to sort it out.
And yes before someone says it, the shoe could have been on the other foot and yes earlier this year May could have made this a confidence motion and expelled JRM etc if they'd refused to back her. She probably should have. Major did do so with Maastricht. The parties had a leadership election knowing where candidates stood now, no "Brexit means Brexit ambiguity, and if Hammond and the rest of the 2019 Remainer Bastards or others can't represent Conservative Policy on something this critical its time to say they can't be Conservatives anymore. Their choice, just as it was 1993 Eurosceptic Bastards had to face up to their party or conscience choice over Maastricht.
She had three opportunities to vote for an orderly Brexit. Each time she voted no.
Quite. If mature now means vote according to the party line and cry crocodile tears afterwards then there are a large number of mature MPs out there. That opinion may be a brave one.
Why should anybody vote for a Tory brexit. You all fail to accept that the government is a conservative one with DUP c&s they have the majority in parliament. It is their responsibility to vote for the governments policy. If they don’t then it has absolutely nothing to do with anybody else for their failure. Oppositions oppose, governments propose legislation that they are supposed to know can attract a majority. No matter how you spin it blame lies solely with the ERG, DUP and the rest of the Conservative party. Time to let the eat their own shit
Which part of the WA would Labour change? That's the only bit that matters. The PD is just window dressing.
Permanent Customs Union and access to the Single Market.
Christ, I've said it enough times the above sentence auto-completed!
She had three opportunities to vote for an orderly Brexit. Each time she voted no.
Quite. If mature now means vote according to the party line and cry crocodile tears afterwards then there are a large number of mature MPs out there. That opinion may be a brave one.
Why should anybody vote for a Tory brexit. You all fail to accept that the government is a conservative one with DUP c&s they have the majority in parliament. It is their responsibility to vote for the governments policy. If they don’t then it has absolutely nothing to do with anybody else for their failure. Oppositions oppose, governments propose legislation that they are supposed to know can attract a majority. No matter how you spin it blame lies solely with the ERG, DUP and the rest of the Conservative party. Time to let the eat their own shit
Which part of the WA would Labour change? That's the only bit that matters. The PD is just window dressing.
Permanent Customs Union and access to the Single Market.
Christ, I've said it enough times the above sentence auto-completed!
The EU aren't negotiating anything permanent in the WA though, permanent ambitions are for the PD and must be negotiated post-withdrawal.
She had three opportunities to vote for an orderly Brexit. Each time she voted no.
Quite. If mature now means vote according to the party line and cry crocodile tears afterwards then there are a large number of mature MPs out there. That opinion may be a brave one.
Why should anybody vote for a Tory brexit. You all fail to accept that the government is a conservative one with DUP c&s they have the majority in parliament. It is their responsibility to vote for the governments policy. If they don’t then it has absolutely nothing to do with anybody else for their failure. Oppositions oppose, governments propose legislation that they are supposed to know can attract a majority. No matter how you spin it blame lies solely with the ERG, DUP and the rest of the Conservative party. Time to let the eat their own shit
Which part of the WA would Labour change? That's the only bit that matters. The PD is just window dressing.
Permanent Customs Union and access to the Single Market.
Christ, I've said it enough times the above sentence auto-completed!
Except that can't go in the WA. The EU won't negotiate the future relationship until we are out. That was the point of the transition period.
This site is nowadays astro-turfed with articles with the monotonously same message ("BoJo is a moron", "Brexit is madness", "Leavers are morons, idiots or worse", "Farage is fascist" " "The tories will be defeated" etc etc etc...).
Not how I've read them but if you want to write something non-bonkers and send it to OGH he'll generally publish other takes...
You show me an article here that is pro-Brexit, Pro-Bojo and pro the suspension of 4 days of Parliament's sitting. There are plenty of articles in the rest of the mainstream press. Even the Guardian occasionally runs such an article.
Never on PB. Never.....
The obvious solution is to write one yourself instead of whingeing about it. As far as I understand it anyone can submit a piece and so long as it's of sufficient quality I expect it will be published. It's not up to OGH to go looking for pro-Johnson, pro-prorogation, pro No Deal articles if people that hold those views can't be arsed to write an article.
Yep. Done a couple myself in the past and never had an issue getting one published. I may disagree strongly with OGH and TSE below the line but they have always been scrupulously even handed when dealing with submissions.
Of all the bizarre political phenomena conjured by Brexit, the recent spectacle of liberal and even left-wing people beseeching the stars for rescue by Regina ex Machina must be the most intriguing and baffling.
She had three opportunities to vote for an orderly Brexit. Each time she voted no.
Quite. If mature now means vote according to the party line and cry crocodile tears afterwards then there are a large number of mature MPs out there. That opinion may be a brave one.
She had three opportunities to vote for an orderly Brexit. Each time she voted no.
Quite. If mature now means vote according to the party line and cry crocodile tears afterwards then there are a large number of mature MPs out there. That opinion may be a brave one.
Why should anybody vote for a Tory brexit. You all fail to accept that the government is a conservative one with DUP c&s they have the majority in parliament. It is their responsibility to vote for the governments policy. If they don’t then it has absolutely nothing to do with anybody else for their failure. Oppositions oppose, governments propose legislation that they are supposed to know can attract a majority. No matter how you spin it blame lies solely with the ERG, DUP and the rest of the Conservative party. Time to let the eat their own shit
Are opponents of no deal more concerned about avoiding it, or who gets the blame for it happening?
Kudos for Boris if it is true he is making Brexit a confidence issue - it definitely should be and it was a sign of the weakness of May that she didn't do the same and the arrogance and delusional nature of her that she thought she could continue with it after those colossal defeats.
I've said all along damn the FTPA it should be possible still to act as if something this important is a confidence motion and treat it the same. Too right if it is being done now, that is the only mature solution to this mess.
Yes barring Hammond etc from standing again may remove the majority. So be it. The majority hasn't really been there all along and if a confidence motion can't command a majority of the house then again damn the FTPA there should be an election to sort it out.
And yes before someone says it, the shoe could have been on the other foot and yes earlier this year May could have made this a confidence motion and expelled JRM etc if they'd refused to back her. She probably should have. Major did do so with Maastricht. The parties had a leadership election knowing where candidates stood now, no "Brexit means Brexit ambiguity, and if Hammond and the rest of the 2019 Remainer Bastards or others can't represent Conservative Policy on something this critical its time to say they can't be Conservatives anymore. Their choice, just as it was 1993 Eurosceptic Bastards had to face up to their party or conscience choice over Maastricht.
Rob & Philip - the EU wouldn't force us out of the CU. It would represent No Change. Likewise the transition could be achieved by staying in the SM until a semi detached solution is developed.
Anyway, this is all academic as I don't expect Starmer to be leading negotiations any time soon.
I’m not disputing that, but that was’t the implication and you know it.
Democracy is not democracy when its based on dishonesty.
The implication was we couldn't spend that money as we wished, wasn't it?
No. You are rewriting history. The implication was that suddenly we’ll have an extra free £350m that wasn’t benefiting Britain to spend.
You know that is true and you can’t believe the suckers fell for it can you.
It’s grim. It really is.
No, the implication was we sent £350mn a year to Brussels, that it should be spent on other things, and not on things the EU tell us to spend it on. Isn't that true?
I’m not disputing that, but that was’t the implication and you know it.
Democracy is not democracy when its based on dishonesty.
The implication was we couldn't spend that money as we wished, wasn't it?
No. You are rewriting history. The implication was that suddenly we’ll have an extra free £350m that wasn’t benefiting Britain to spend.
You know that is true and you can’t believe the suckers fell for it can you.
It’s grim. It really is.
No, the implication was we sent £350mn a year to Brussels, that it should be spent on other things, and not on things the EU tell us to spend it on. Isn't that true?
I don't think a dozen will be enough. If it were a question of a simple vote, maybe, but it's not.
The striking thing is that if Stewart's estimate is true, 95% of Tory MPs have fallen into line behind this suicidal policy.
It's so very disappointing that Stewart is failing to move on. There has to be a degree to which you accept referenda, and you accept leadership elections, and also you accept general elections.
Admittedly tough times, but he surely has to give the winner of the Tory leadership race at least a little bit of room.
Absolutely. If his ego won't let him accept the referendum or the leadership election or the whip then why should he keep the whip?
I don't think a dozen will be enough. If it were a question of a simple vote, maybe, but it's not.
The striking thing is that if Stewart's estimate is true, 95% of Tory MPs have fallen into line behind this suicidal policy.
It's so very disappointing that Stewart is failing to move on. There has to be a degree to which you accept referenda, and you accept leadership elections, and also you accept general elections.
Admittedly tough times, but he surely has to give the winner of the Tory leadership race at least a little bit of room.
Absolutely. If his ego won't let him accept the referendum or the leadership election or the whip then why should he keep the whip?
I suppose this is the kind of character assassination the few sane Tories will have to expect now from the loony majority.
I don't think a dozen will be enough. If it were a question of a simple vote, maybe, but it's not.
The striking thing is that if Stewart's estimate is true, 95% of Tory MPs have fallen into line behind this suicidal policy.
It's so very disappointing that Stewart is failing to move on. There has to be a degree to which you accept referenda, and you accept leadership elections, and also you accept general elections.
Admittedly tough times, but he surely has to give the winner of the Tory leadership race at least a little bit of room.
Absolutely. If his ego won't let him accept the referendum or the leadership election or the whip then why should he keep the whip?
Against stupidity the Gods themselves contend in vain.....
Kudos for Boris if it is true he is making Brexit a confidence issue
It's a dumbass move.
It allows MPs who were going to VoNC him to do so without any of the fallout of nominating another leader or calling an election.
It leaves him in office and out of power.
Genius
What are you talking about?
If the VoNC him then they need to either nominate another leader or there has to be an election. There is no alternative.
Treating this as a confidence motion doesn't mean that if it loses he has lost a VoNC, it just means those who broke the whip suffer the same consequences they would have had they voted against in a VoNC. Now that may make them more tempted to subsequently VoNC but they could have done anyway.
And in office but out of power is what any PM is if they're too timid to enforce the whip. That's what May was. Either the whip means something or it doesn't, this is a matter of the utmost importance and Parliament needs confidence in its executive or we need a new executive or a new Parliament.
She had three opportunities to vote for an orderly Brexit. Each time she voted no.
Quite. If mature now means vote according to the party line and cry crocodile tears afterwards then there are a large number of mature MPs out there. That opinion may be a brave one.
She had three opportunities to vote for an orderly Brexit. Each time she voted no.
Quite. If mature now means vote according to the party line and cry crocodile tears afterwards then there are a large number of mature MPs out there. That opinion may be a brave one.
Why should anybody vote for a Tory brexit. You all fail to accept that the government is a conservative one with DUP c&s they have the majority in parliament. It is their responsibility to vote for the governments policy. If they don’t then it has absolutely nothing to do with anybody else for their failure. Oppositions oppose, governments propose legislation that they are supposed to know can attract a majority. No matter how you spin it blame lies solely with the ERG, DUP and the rest of the Conservative party. Time to let the eat their own shit
Are opponents of no deal more concerned about avoiding it, or who gets the blame for it happening?
Governments make choices, that is why they are there, what they choose to do is their responsibility, nobody else’s. Let them get on with it as it’s clear that the EU are so scared of no deal we will get a brilliant deal but at the same time we have nothing to worry about no deal! It’s their problem nobody elses
I don't think a dozen will be enough. If it were a question of a simple vote, maybe, but it's not.
The striking thing is that if Stewart's estimate is true, 95% of Tory MPs have fallen into line behind this suicidal policy.
It's so very disappointing that Stewart is failing to move on. There has to be a degree to which you accept referenda, and you accept leadership elections, and also you accept general elections.
Admittedly tough times, but he surely has to give the winner of the Tory leadership race at least a little bit of room.
Absolutely. If his ego won't let him accept the referendum or the leadership election or the whip then why should he keep the whip?
I suppose this is the kind of character assassination the few sane Tories will have to expect now from the loony majority.
Sane Tories are the 95% who don't want to drag this on, and a special mention for Ken Clarke who was the ONLY Tory to vote against Brexit consistently by voting against invoking Article 50.
Voting to invoke Article 50 but to vote against actually Brexiting at the end of the notice period, with or without a deal is many things but sane is not one of them.
Corbyn says next week is the last chance to stop a no deal Brexit. I assume he’s ruled out whipping his MPs to vote for May’s deal then...
Next week is the last chance to initiate a sequence of events which would permit a General Election to be held before October 31st - if we make it to the proposed prorogation without MPs succeeding in blocking it, then that specific route will be firmly closed by the time they come back after conference season. But the option to throw out the current Government and install an alternative amenable to asking for an extension (or revoking A50) is possible almost up until the last minute, I would've thought...?
I think that's right, if the numbers are there and new leader's identity is agreed it only takes days. The last two weeks of October may be not without interest if the box of fireworks is not exploded in the next 10 days. It could be Boris and EU racing to get a deal and everyone else trying to stop them.
I also have a curious feeling that Gina Miller will think, if necessary, that while triggering Art 50 required a commons vote, withdrawing it won't. A compliant PM will be quite sufficient. (And I think that will be legally correct FWIW).
Kudos for Boris if it is true he is making Brexit a confidence issue
It's a dumbass move.
It allows MPs who were going to VoNC him to do so without any of the fallout of nominating another leader or calling an election.
It leaves him in office and out of power.
Genius
Not so. It removes the ability for Remainer MPs to have a relatively free hit at Boris. Any Tory MP voting for an anti no deal motion is declaring no confidence in a Tory government's Brexit policy, and they should be dealt with accordingly. Boris is absolutely right to do this.
She had three opportunities to vote for an orderly Brexit. Each time she voted no.
Quite. If mature now means vote according to the party line and cry crocodile tears afterwards then there are a large number of mature MPs out there. That opinion may be a brave one.
She had three opportunities to vote for an orderly Brexit. Each time she voted no.
Quite. If mature now means vote according to the party line and cry crocodile tears afterwards then there are a large number of mature MPs out there. That opinion may be a brave one.
Why should anybody vote for a Tory brexit. You all fail to accept that the government is a conservative one with DUP c&s they have the majority in parliament. It is their responsibility to vote for the governments policy. If they don’t then it has absolutely nothing to do with anybody else for their failure. Oppositions oppose, governments propose legislation that they are supposed to know can attract a majority. No matter how you spin it blame lies solely with the ERG, DUP and the rest of the Conservative party. Time to let the eat their own shit
“I would do anything for love, but I won’t do that.”
She had three opportunities to vote for an orderly Brexit. Each time she voted no.
Quite. If mature now means vote according to the party line and cry crocodile tears afterwards then there are a large number of mature MPs out there. That opinion may be a brave one.
Why should anybody vote for a Tory brexit. You all fail to accept that the government is a conservative one with DUP c&s they have the majority in parliament. It is their responsibility to vote for the governments policy. If they don’t then it has absolutely nothing to do with anybody else for their failure. Oppositions oppose, governments propose legislation that they are supposed to know can attract a majority. No matter how you spin it blame lies solely with the ERG, DUP and the rest of the Conservative party. Time to let the eat their own shit
Which part of the WA would Labour change? That's the only bit that matters. The PD is just window dressing.
Permanent Customs Union and access to the Single Market.
Christ, I've said it enough times the above sentence auto-completed!
But then they recommend voting against it in a referendum
My 16 year old could come up with something more sensible
My key thought is that Team Boris won't hang around waiting to see what the NoDealers do... they'll take the initiative themselves, just as they did with the Conference Prorogation that no-one predicted or was expecting. Game On.
My key thought is that Team Boris won't hang around waiting to see what the NoDealers do... they'll take the initiative themselves, just as they did with the Conference Prorogation that no-one predicted or was expecting. Game On.
This falls on the GATT 24 point which only applies when both sides are discussing an FTA, we put this to bed weeks ago.
In the article the scenario was that the EU agreed to this.
Would they? To be honest the whole thing is too bloody complicated for me, who was it that decided it was a good idea for us to have a binary referendum on an ill thought out question without any checks and balances and promise to implant the result?
Rees Mogg, Cummings are not stupid. They've got something up their sleeve to manipulate events for Tuesday /Wednesday to prevent a SO24 action. Don't know what it is, 'escorting' and hence delaying the speaker's plane from Turkey to Virginia with F35s as a 'training exercise terrorist on board', or some urgent matter on finances which can't be trumped. They've been planning shock and awe for a while...
She had three opportunities to vote for an orderly Brexit. Each time she voted no.
Quite. If mature now means vote according to the party line and cry crocodile tears afterwards then there are a large number of mature MPs out there. That opinion may be a brave one.
Why should anybody vote for a Tory brexit. You all fail to accept that the government is a conservative one with DUP c&s they have the majority in parliament. It is their responsibility to vote for the governments policy. If they don’t then it has absolutely nothing to do with anybody else for their failure. Oppositions oppose, governments propose legislation that they are supposed to know can attract a majority. No matter how you spin it blame lies solely with the ERG, DUP and the rest of the Conservative party. Time to let the eat their own shit
Which part of the WA would Labour change? That's the only bit that matters. The PD is just window dressing.
Permanent Customs Union and access to the Single Market.
Christ, I've said it enough times the above sentence auto-completed!
But then they recommend voting against it in a referendum
My 16 year old could come up with something more sensible
On the face of it, not very sensible, I agree. But both of those deals will get acceptance of the EU and the HoC and one will be chosen in a public vote. This is an improvement on the May/Johnson efforts that get the agreement of neither the HoC and the EU.
Kudos for Boris if it is true he is making Brexit a confidence issue - it definitely should be and it was a sign of the weakness of May that she didn't do the same and the arrogance and delusional nature of her that she thought she could continue with it after those colossal defeats.
I've said all along damn the FTPA it should be possible still to act as if something this important is a confidence motion and treat it the same. Too right if it is being done now, that is the only mature solution to this mess.
Yes barring Hammond etc from standing again may remove the majority. So be it. The majority hasn't really been there all along and if a confidence motion can't command a majority of the house then again damn the FTPA there should be an election to sort it out.
There's not a huge amount in this with which I disagree. We have to get past the 2016 Referendum result which is the anchor round our ankle as POTUS put it.
A GE could and should do that as it would be clear - a No Deal exit with the official Conservatives, Remain/Revoke with the LDs and some others, Exit with a Deal for the unofficial Conservatives and as for Labour, who knows or cares? The only logical approach to contain Corbyn's view would be to Revoke followed by an immediate restart of A50 with the aim of crafting a whole new WA.
It would have to be clear this would be the end of it though I expect plenty of Facebook trolls will be wittering on about "respecting the 2016 result" in 2116.
She had three opportunities to vote for an orderly Brexit. Each time she voted no.
Quite. If mature now means vote according to the party line and cry crocodile tears afterwards then there are a large number of mature MPs out there. That opinion may be a brave one.
She had three opportunities to vote for an orderly Brexit. Each time she voted no.
Quite. If mature now means vote according to the party line and cry crocodile tears afterwards then there are a large number of mature MPs out there. That opinion may be a brave one.
Why should anybody vote for a Tory brexit. You all fail to accept that the government is a conservative one with DUP c&s they have the majority in parliament. It is their responsibility to vote for the governments policy. If they don’t then it has absolutely nothing to do with anybody else for their failure. Oppositions oppose, governments propose legislation that they are supposed to know can attract a majority. No matter how you spin it blame lies solely with the ERG, DUP and the rest of the Conservative party. Time to let the eat their own shit
Are opponents of no deal more concerned about avoiding it, or who gets the blame for it happening?
Governments make choices, that is why they are there, what they choose to do is their responsibility, nobody else’s. Let them get on with it as it’s clear that the EU are so scared of no deal we will get a brilliant deal but at the same time we have nothing to worry about no deal! It’s their problem nobody elses
So opponents of no deal don’t really think it’s that important to prevent it, and accept the Govt’s official line on this. Glad we’ve got that sorted.
The Conservatives are not putting party before country, and neither are Labour. Great!
Exactly. A deal won't happen unless the EU co-operates... either removing the backstop and replacing with tech solutions in PD or agreeing to start FTA talks straight away and invoking GATT24. Of course, if they don't then all bets are off and La Ribeira Merda beckons.
Well next week may, or maybe not, the most exciting week in U.K. politics since ......... I’m not sure it will but I’m wondering, as I go to bed what jeremy and the overwithits first hit would be called. An interesting challenge to stretch the pb faithful. I’ll start with the fool on the no 10 hill. If you want to be serious fairy snuff but just have some fun we can’t change diddly
My key thought is that Team Boris won't hang around waiting to see what the NoDealers do... they'll take the initiative themselves, just as they did with the Conference Prorogation that no-one predicted or was expecting. Game On.
She had three opportunities to vote for an orderly Brexit. Each time she voted no.
Quite. If mature now means vote according to the party line and cry crocodile tears afterwards then there are a large number of mature MPs out there. That opinion may be a brave one.
She had three opportunities to vote for an orderly Brexit. Each time she voted no.
Quite. If mature now means vote according to the party line and cry crocodile tears afterwards then there are a large number of mature MPs out there. That opinion may be a brave one.
Why should anybody vote for a Tory brexit. You all fail to accept that the government is a conservative one with DUP c&s they have the majority in parliament. It is their responsibility to vote for the governments policy. If they don’t then it has absolutely nothing to do with anybody else for their failure. Oppositions oppose, governments propose legislation that they are supposed to know can attract a majority. No matter how you spin it blame lies solely with the ERG, DUP and the rest of the Conservative party. Time to let the eat their own shit
Are opponents of no deal more concerned about avoiding it, or who gets the blame for it happening?
Governments make choices, that is why they are there, what they choose to do is their responsibility, nobody else’s. Let them get on with it as it’s clear that the EU are so scared of no deal we will get a brilliant deal but at the same time we have nothing to worry about no deal! It’s their problem nobody elses
So opponents of no deal don’t really think it’s that important to prevent it, and accept the Govt’s official line on this. Glad we’ve got that sorted.
The Conservatives are not putting party before country, and neither are Labour. Great!
It’s up to the government to pass government policy no one else
I don't think a dozen will be enough. If it were a question of a simple vote, maybe, but it's not.
The striking thing is that if Stewart's estimate is true, 95% of Tory MPs have fallen into line behind this suicidal policy.
It's so very disappointing that Stewart is failing to move on. There has to be a degree to which you accept referenda, and you accept leadership elections, and also you accept general elections.
Admittedly tough times, but he surely has to give the winner of the Tory leadership race at least a little bit of room.
Absolutely. If his ego won't let him accept the referendum or the leadership election or the whip then why should he keep the whip?
I suppose this is the kind of character assassination the few sane Tories will have to expect now from the loony majority.
Sane Tories are the 95% who don't want to drag this on ...
No one expects the loony Tories to realise they've lost their minds!
I don't think a dozen will be enough. If it were a question of a simple vote, maybe, but it's not.
The striking thing is that if Stewart's estimate is true, 95% of Tory MPs have fallen into line behind this suicidal policy.
It's so very disappointing that Stewart is failing to move on. There has to be a degree to which you accept referenda, and you accept leadership elections, and also you accept general elections.
Admittedly tough times, but he surely has to give the winner of the Tory leadership race at least a little bit of room.
Absolutely. If his ego won't let him accept the referendum or the leadership election or the whip then why should he keep the whip?
I suppose this is the kind of character assassination the few sane Tories will have to expect now from the loony majority.
Sane Tories are the 95% who don't want to drag this on ...
No one expects the loony Tories to realise they've lost their minds!
I see Rory mentioned his deeply sheep farming community. I think he knows what he is doing wrt to deselection crap.
She had three opportunities to vote for an orderly Brexit. Each time she voted no.
Quite. If mature now means vote according to the party line and cry crocodile tears afterwards then there are a large number of mature MPs out there. That opinion may be a brave one.
She had three opportunities to vote for an orderly Brexit. Each time she voted no.
Quite. If mature now means vote according to the party line and cry crocodile tears afterwards then there are a large number of mature MPs out there. That opinion may be a brave one.
Why should anybody vote for a Tory brexit. You all fail to accept that the government is a conservative one with DUP c&s they have the majority in parliament. It is their responsibility to vote for the governments policy. If they don’t then it has absolutely nothing to do with anybody else for their failure. Oppositions oppose, governments propose legislation that they are supposed to know can attract a majority. No matter how you spin it blame lies solely with the ERG, DUP and the rest of the Conservative party. Time to let the eat their own shit
Are opponents of no deal more concerned about avoiding it, or who gets the blame for it happening?
Governments make choices, that is why they are there, what they choose to do is their responsibility, nobody else’s. Let them get on with it as it’s clear that the EU are so scared of no deal we will get a brilliant deal but at the same time we have nothing to worry about no deal! It’s their problem nobody elses
So opponents of no deal don’t really think it’s that important to prevent it, and accept the Govt’s official line on this. Glad we’ve got that sorted.
The Conservatives are not putting party before country, and neither are Labour. Great!
It’s up to the government to pass government policy no one else
Ah, but May’s deal is no longer Government policy, so it should be OK for Labour to vote for it now...?
My key thought is that Team Boris won't hang around waiting to see what the NoDealers do... they'll take the initiative themselves, just as they did with the Conference Prorogation that no-one predicted or was expecting. Game On.
If the VoNC him then they need to either nominate another leader or there has to be an election. There is no alternative.
They don't need to VoNC him.
They can vote to make an extension the law, which leaves him in office and out of power.
The only sanction they will receive is the same one they would have if they VoNCed, which they don't need to do to achieve the same result.
They could already do that and it would be just a rebellion. Now if they do that they terminate their careers, their actions have consequences.
They may still choose to do it, so be it, but it reduces not increases the odds of an extension being the law. And if Boris says he will act like Queen Anne and instruct HMQ to veto the law meaning they need to VONC him to achieve their legislation then we're back to square one. But less likely to get their because the threat was already made to their careers.
If the VoNC him then they need to either nominate another leader or there has to be an election. There is no alternative.
They don't need to VoNC him.
They can vote to make an extension the law, which leaves him in office and out of power.
The only sanction they will receive is the same one they would have if they VoNCed, which they don't need to do to achieve the same result.
They could already do that and it would be just a rebellion. Now if they do that they terminate their careers, their actions have consequences.
They may still choose to do it, so be it, but it reduces not increases the odds of an extension being the law. And if Boris says he will act like Queen Anne and instruct HMQ to veto the law meaning they need to VONC him to achieve their legislation then we're back to square one. But less likely to get their because the threat was already made to their careers.
The idea that the Queen is going to refuse royal assent for a bill passed by Parliament is for the birds IMO.
She had three opportunities to vote for an orderly Brexit. Each time she voted no.
Quite. If mature now means vote according to the party line and cry crocodile tears afterwards then there are a large number of mature MPs out there. That opinion may be a brave one.
Why should anybody vote for a Tory brexit. You all fail to accept that the government is a conservative one with DUP c&s they have the majority in parliament. It is their responsibility to vote for the governments policy. If they don’t then it has absolutely nothing to do with anybody else for their failure. Oppositions oppose, governments propose legislation that they are supposed to know can attract a majority. No matter how you spin it blame lies solely with the ERG, DUP and the rest of the Conservative party. Time to let the eat their own shit
Are opponents of no deal more concerned about avoiding it, or who gets the blame for it happening?
Governments make choices, that is why they are there, what they choose to do is their responsibility, nobody else’s. Let them get on with it as it’s clear that the EU are so scared of no deal we will get a brilliant deal but at the same time we have nothing to worry about no deal! It’s their problem nobody elses
So opponents of no deal don’t really think it’s that important to prevent it, and accept the Govt’s official line on this. Glad we’ve got that sorted.
The Conservatives are not putting party before country, and neither are Labour. Great!
It’s up to the government to pass government policy no one else
Ah, but May’s deal is no longer Government policy, so it should be OK for Labour to vote for it now...?
If Johnson (not boris) brings a withdrawal agreement back to the commons it is up to his government to pass it, if it fails because his coalition fails to back it any subsequent actions are his and his alone responsibility.
Good article. But will the anti-Boris people find a cunning plan which is pro something instead of against something?
Labour's policy is to negotiate a different deal based on different red lines and put it to the electorate in a referendum. To get there they want to legislate to prevent no deal and hold a general election that they want to win so they are in a position to negotiate a different deal. This plan is not particularly cunning but it is definitely one with its own defined objective and is not simply about saying no.
aha - so they get this great deal and then at a referendum campaign against it?
And of course the EU will negotiate a great deal with a counter party that will recommend against its acceptance.
Do you realise how stupid that looks?
I did say it wasn't a very cunning plan! To be fair it is not clear what side if any Labour will take in the referendum. I think it is reasonable to give the public a final say on the deal once we know what it looks like, and I believe there is majority support in polls for that referendum to take place. So it's a reasonable position for them to take. For a long time Labour did not have a coherent position but a lot of people seem reluctant to accept that they have now arrived at a plan of sorts. It certainly is not as stupid as the current government's approach, and it is far from the truth to claim that the party is simply saying no to everything, as many people here keep saying.
If the VoNC him then they need to either nominate another leader or there has to be an election. There is no alternative.
They don't need to VoNC him.
They can vote to make an extension the law, which leaves him in office and out of power.
The only sanction they will receive is the same one they would have if they VoNCed, which they don't need to do to achieve the same result.
They could already do that and it would be just a rebellion. Now if they do that they terminate their careers, their actions have consequences.
They may still choose to do it, so be it, but it reduces not increases the odds of an extension being the law. And if Boris says he will act like Queen Anne and instruct HMQ to veto the law meaning they need to VONC him to achieve their legislation then we're back to square one. But less likely to get their because the threat was already made to their careers.
Letwin is standing down anyway. He can go out in a blaze of glory fighting to stay in the EU. Some others too perhaps.
My key thought is that Team Boris won't hang around waiting to see what the NoDealers do... they'll take the initiative themselves, just as they did with the Conference Prorogation that no-one predicted or was expecting. Game On.
If the VoNC him then they need to either nominate another leader or there has to be an election. There is no alternative.
They don't need to VoNC him.
They can vote to make an extension the law, which leaves him in office and out of power.
The only sanction they will receive is the same one they would have if they VoNCed, which they don't need to do to achieve the same result.
They could already do that and it would be just a rebellion. Now if they do that they terminate their careers, their actions have consequences.
They may still choose to do it, so be it, but it reduces not increases the odds of an extension being the law. And if Boris says he will act like Queen Anne and instruct HMQ to veto the law meaning they need to VONC him to achieve their legislation then we're back to square one. But less likely to get their because the threat was already made to their careers.
Letwin is standing down anyway. He can go out in a blaze of glory fighting to stay in the EU. Some others too perhaps.
Exactly. A deal won't happen unless the EU co-operates... either removing the backstop and replacing with tech solutions in PD or agreeing to start FTA talks straight away and invoking GATT24. Of course, if they don't then all bets are off and La Ribeira Merda beckons.
This falls on the GATT 24 point which only applies when both sides are discussing an FTA, we put this to bed weeks ago.
In the article the scenario was that the EU agreed to this.
Invest in Merda in that case. Those predictions are possible by October 31, just as it's possible I will swept away by a tsunami the next time I step outside my front door. It's just I don't spend much time considering the possibility.
My prediction for what it's worth, is that the EU will say to the UK, come back when you are serious.
If the VoNC him then they need to either nominate another leader or there has to be an election. There is no alternative.
They don't need to VoNC him.
They can vote to make an extension the law, which leaves him in office and out of power.
The only sanction they will receive is the same one they would have if they VoNCed, which they don't need to do to achieve the same result.
They could already do that and it would be just a rebellion. Now if they do that they terminate their careers, their actions have consequences.
They may still choose to do it, so be it, but it reduces not increases the odds of an extension being the law. And if Boris says he will act like Queen Anne and instruct HMQ to veto the law meaning they need to VONC him to achieve their legislation then we're back to square one. But less likely to get their because the threat was already made to their careers.
The idea that the Queen is going to refuse royal assent for a bill passed by Parliament is for the birds IMO.
You can’t be serious? If that happens I think this weekends very polite and positive demonstrations may notch up a degree. Leave wanted to take back control but I wonder who they wanted to gain that control it’s obviously not parliament
Rees Mogg, Cummings are not stupid. They've got something up their sleeve to manipulate events for Tuesday /Wednesday to prevent a SO24 action. Don't know what it is, 'escorting' and hence delaying the speaker's plane from Turkey to Virginia with F35s as a 'training exercise terrorist on board', or some urgent matter on finances which can't be trumped. They've been planning shock and awe for a while...
Think next week we're likely to see a battle of whills between Bercow and JRM (wuth Cummings in the background)
Sane Tories are the 95% who don't want to drag this on, and a special mention for Ken Clarke who was the ONLY Tory to vote against Brexit consistently by voting against invoking Article 50.
Voting to invoke Article 50 but to vote against actually Brexiting at the end of the notice period, with or without a deal is many things but sane is not one of them.
I must lay off the green cheese - another @Philip_Thompson post with which I mostly agree.The Overwithers have taken over the Conservative Party and the consequences be damned - we have to get out of the EU on 31/10.
Worth mentioning 47 Labour MPs voted against invoking A50 (including my local MP, Stephen Timms) as did 7 LDs, Caroline Lucas and the SNP.
Those blaming the "diehard Remainers" often forget that. It's also worth re-reading the Lancaster House Speech given by Theresa May in March 2017 to see how far we haven't come.
This was the section on Northern Ireland:
We cannot forget that, as we leave, the United Kingdom will share a land border with the EU, and maintaining that Common Travel Area with the Republic of Ireland will be an important priority for the UK in the talks ahead. There has been a Common Travel Area between the UK and the Republic of Ireland for many years.
Indeed, it was formed before either of our 2 countries were members of the European Union. And the family ties and bonds of affection that unite our 2 countries mean that there will always be a special relationship between us.
So we will work to deliver a practical solution that allows the maintenance of the Common Travel Area with the Republic, while protecting the integrity of the United Kingdom’s immigration system.
Nobody wants to return to the borders of the past, so we will make it a priority to deliver a practical solution as soon as we can.
The EU has the power to grant extensions to A50, once they receive a request from the sovereign body of the country in question. so could parliament not simply pass a law saying that they give themselves power to demand requests for extensions etc, and then vote to pass an extension. At the point the EU would be obliged to recognise the request as legitimate seeing as it came from the sovereign body in the UK. A way to just circumnavigate Boris and Cummings entirely
My key thought is that Team Boris won't hang around waiting to see what the NoDealers do... they'll take the initiative themselves, just as they did with the Conference Prorogation that no-one predicted or was expecting. Game On.
When people say that a Brexit that involves leaving the single market/customs union is bad for business because the tariffs would make uk business uncompetitive, they are making the argument that low wage earners have made since 2004 and the advent of mass immigration of cheap labour, the argument that meant Leave won.
Good article. But will the anti-Boris people find a cunning plan which is pro something instead of against something?
Labour's policy is to negotiate a different deal based on different red lines and put it to the electorate in a referendum. To get there they want to legislate to prevent no deal and hold a general election that they want to win so they are in a position to negotiate a different deal. This plan is not particularly cunning but it is definitely one with its own defined objective and is not simply about saying no.
aha - so they get this great deal and then at a referendum campaign against it?
And of course the EU will negotiate a great deal with a counter party that will recommend against its acceptance.
Do you realise how stupid that looks?
I did say it wasn't a very cunning plan! To be fair it is not clear what side if any Labour will take in the referendum. I think it is reasonable to give the public a final say on the deal once we know what it looks like, and I believe there is majority support in polls for that referendum to take place. So it's a reasonable position for them to take. For a long time Labour did not have a coherent position but a lot of people seem reluctant to accept that they have now arrived at a plan of sorts. It certainly is not as stupid as the current government's approach, and it is far from the truth to claim that the party is simply saying no to everything, as many people here keep saying.
A deal is useless without agreement on both sides. In that respect the Labour proposal is an improvement on the May/ Johnson approach.
My key thought is that Team Boris won't hang around waiting to see what the NoDealers do... they'll take the initiative themselves, just as they did with the Conference Prorogation that no-one predicted or was expecting. Game On.
She had three opportunities to vote for an orderly Brexit. Each time she voted no.
Quite
Why should anybody vote for a Tory brexit. t. It is their responsibility to vote for the governments policy. If they don’t then it has absolutely nothing to do with anybody else for their failure. Oppositions oppose, governments propose legislation that they are supposed to know can attract a majority. No matter how you spin it blame lies solely with the ERG, DUP and the rest of the Conservative party. Time to let the eat their own shit
Are opponents of no deal more concerned about avoiding it, or who gets the blame for it gappening?
Governments make choices, that is why they are there, what they choose to do is their responsibility, nobody else’s. Let them get on with it as it’s clear that the EU are so scared of no deal we will get a brilliant deal but at the same time we have nothing to worry about no deal! It’s their problem nobody elses
So opponents of no deal don’t really think it’s that important to prevent it, and accept the Govt’s official line on this. Glad we’ve got that sorted.
The Conservatives are not putting party before country, and neither are Labour. Great!
It’s up to the government to pass government policy no one else
Ah, but May’s deal is no longer Government policy, so it should be OK for Labour to vote for it now...?
If Johnson (not boris) brings a withdrawal agreement back to the commons it is up to his government to pass it, if it fails because his coalition fails to back it any subsequent actions are his and his alone responsibility.
FFS i’m not talking about responsibility! Which bit of
Are opponents of no deal more concerned about avoiding it, or who gets the blame for it happening?
wasn’t clear?
If an opponent of no deal states that they will leave no stone unturned to avoid such an outcome, then why is passing a deal which will avoid such an outcome not a stone that can be turned?
Rees Mogg, Cummings are not stupid. They've got something up their sleeve to manipulate events for Tuesday /Wednesday to prevent a SO24 action. Don't know what it is, 'escorting' and hence delaying the speaker's plane from Turkey to Virginia with F35s as a 'training exercise terrorist on board', or some urgent matter on finances which can't be trumped. They've been planning shock and awe for a while...
Think next week we're likely to see a battle of whills between Bercow and JRM (wuth Cummings in the background)
Think Speaker B might finally met his match.
I think the odds are against the MPs trying to block No Deal, but I don't see Rees-Mogg's IQ as the difficulty ;-)
If the VoNC him then they need to either nominate another leader or there has to be an election. There is no alternative.
They don't need to VoNC him.
They can vote to make an extension the law, which leaves him in office and out of power.
The only sanction they will receive is the same one they would have if they VoNCed, which they don't need to do to achieve the same result.
They could already do that and it would be just a rebellion. Now if they do that they terminate their careers, their actions have consequences.
They may still choose to do it, so be it, but it reduces not increases the odds of an extension being the law. And if Boris says he will act like Queen Anne and instruct HMQ to veto the law meaning they need to VONC him to achieve their legislation then we're back to square one. But less likely to get their because the threat was already made to their careers.
The idea that the Queen is going to refuse royal assent for a bill passed by Parliament is for the birds IMO.
You can’t be serious? If that happens I think this weekends very polite and positive demonstrations may notch up a degree. Leave wanted to take back control but I wonder who they wanted to gain that control it’s obviously not parliament
? “For the birds”. Not going to happen. What did you think I meant?
Comments
Now, that would be something. If sustained then surely Corbyn is gone if there is not a GE in Oct/Nov?
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0b/UK_opinion_polls.svg/2000px-UK_opinion_polls.svg.png
I've said all along damn the FTPA it should be possible still to act as if something this important is a confidence motion and treat it the same. Too right if it is being done now, that is the only mature solution to this mess.
Yes barring Hammond etc from standing again may remove the majority. So be it. The majority hasn't really been there all along and if a confidence motion can't command a majority of the house then again damn the FTPA there should be an election to sort it out.
And yes before someone says it, the shoe could have been on the other foot and yes earlier this year May could have made this a confidence motion and expelled JRM etc if they'd refused to back her. She probably should have. Major did do so with Maastricht. The parties had a leadership election knowing where candidates stood now, no "Brexit means Brexit ambiguity, and if Hammond and the rest of the 2019 Remainer Bastards or others can't represent Conservative Policy on something this critical its time to say they can't be Conservatives anymore. Their choice, just as it was 1993 Eurosceptic Bastards had to face up to their party or conscience choice over Maastricht.
Christ, I've said it enough times the above sentence auto-completed!
Anyway, this is all academic as I don't expect Starmer to be leading negotiations any time soon.
It allows MPs who were going to VoNC him to do so without any of the fallout of nominating another leader or calling an election.
It leaves him in office and out of power.
Genius
Brexiters: Endgame
https://www.lifestuff.xyz/blog/brexit-endgame
If the VoNC him then they need to either nominate another leader or there has to be an election. There is no alternative.
Treating this as a confidence motion doesn't mean that if it loses he has lost a VoNC, it just means those who broke the whip suffer the same consequences they would have had they voted against in a VoNC. Now that may make them more tempted to subsequently VoNC but they could have done anyway.
And in office but out of power is what any PM is if they're too timid to enforce the whip. That's what May was. Either the whip means something or it doesn't, this is a matter of the utmost importance and Parliament needs confidence in its executive or we need a new executive or a new Parliament.
Voting to invoke Article 50 but to vote against actually Brexiting at the end of the notice period, with or without a deal is many things but sane is not one of them.
I also have a curious feeling that Gina Miller will think, if necessary, that while triggering Art 50 required a commons vote, withdrawing it won't. A compliant PM will be quite sufficient. (And I think that will be legally correct FWIW).
They can vote to make an extension the law, which leaves him in office and out of power.
The only sanction they will receive is the same one they would have if they VoNCed, which they don't need to do to achieve the same result.
My 16 year old could come up with something more sensible
Without this they had to VoNC. Now they can get the same result without a VoNC.
Game On.
If Parliament votes to make BoZo extend, how long does Cummings have left in No 10?
A GE could and should do that as it would be clear - a No Deal exit with the official Conservatives, Remain/Revoke with the LDs and some others, Exit with a Deal for the unofficial Conservatives and as for Labour, who knows or cares? The only logical approach to contain Corbyn's view would be to Revoke followed by an immediate restart of A50 with the aim of crafting a whole new WA.
It would have to be clear this would be the end of it though I expect plenty of Facebook trolls will be wittering on about "respecting the 2016 result" in 2116.
The Conservatives are not putting party before country, and neither are Labour. Great!
https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1167878820453478400
https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1167878822676451329
Corn Laws Redux.
They may still choose to do it, so be it, but it reduces not increases the odds of an extension being the law. And if Boris says he will act like Queen Anne and instruct HMQ to veto the law meaning they need to VONC him to achieve their legislation then we're back to square one. But less likely to get their because the threat was already made to their careers.
For a long time Labour did not have a coherent position but a lot of people seem reluctant to accept that they have now arrived at a plan of sorts. It certainly is not as stupid as the current government's approach, and it is far from the truth to claim that the party is simply saying no to everything, as many people here keep saying.
My prediction for what it's worth, is that the EU will say to the UK, come back when you are serious.
Think Speaker B might finally met his match.
Worth mentioning 47 Labour MPs voted against invoking A50 (including my local MP, Stephen Timms) as did 7 LDs, Caroline Lucas and the SNP.
Those blaming the "diehard Remainers" often forget that. It's also worth re-reading the Lancaster House Speech given by Theresa May in March 2017 to see how far we haven't come.
This was the section on Northern Ireland:
We cannot forget that, as we leave, the United Kingdom will share a land border with the EU, and maintaining that Common Travel Area with the Republic of Ireland will be an important priority for the UK in the talks ahead. There has been a Common Travel Area between the UK and the Republic of Ireland for many years.
Indeed, it was formed before either of our 2 countries were members of the European Union. And the family ties and bonds of affection that unite our 2 countries mean that there will always be a special relationship between us.
So we will work to deliver a practical solution that allows the maintenance of the Common Travel Area with the Republic, while protecting the integrity of the United Kingdom’s immigration system.
Nobody wants to return to the borders of the past, so we will make it a priority to deliver a practical solution as soon as we can.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EDAA5o6xMc4
Are opponents of no deal more concerned about avoiding it, or who gets the blame for it happening?
wasn’t clear?
If an opponent of no deal states that they will leave no stone unturned to avoid such an outcome, then why is passing a deal which will avoid such an outcome not a stone that can be turned?
I've given both,
Le Clerc at evens
and,
Celtic at 2/1
The Treatment.
I recommend you do the same.